Perfect. I could have sworn I looked up all the options to ensure I didn't
do that! I am very appreciative.
Cheers,
matthew
> From: Carlo Wood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Sun, 7 Sep 2003 01:01:12 +0200
> To: Matthew Edward Porter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re:
What's the problem with just putting
*:
In your ALIASES file?
William L. Polhemus, Jr. P.E.
Polhemus Engineering Company
Katy, Texas USA
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Steven
W. Orr
Sent: Saturday, September 06, 2003 9:39 PM
To: s
IIRC, sa-learn doesn't appear til 2.5x.
Do what I did: Compile from the tarball sources. It's not that tough (can't
be if even I can do it).
William L. Polhemus, Jr. P.E.
Polhemus Engineering Company
Katy, Texas USA
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
I also run RH 9.0.
FWIW, I simply went and got (and compiled) Version 2.55 from the tarballs.
The RPMs are good, but sometimes I just don't have the patience to wait till
someone comes out with them (and I don't the inclination to learn how to
make SRPMs myself).
I like compiling from Source.
W
On Sat, Sep 06, 2003 at 09:04:33PM -0700, Scott wrote:
> Thanks. I got the source rpm for 2.55 and built it on my redhat 8 dev box
> and all is well now. But I don't understand why sa-learn isn't in the
> spamassassin rpm that ships with redhat-8. It seems that it should be an
> integral part
Theo Van Dinter wrote:
On Sat, Sep 06, 2003 at 08:04:22PM -0700, Scott wrote:
My redhat 8 box with courier and spamassassin doesn't have sa-learn
included in the rpm. All three of my test boxes below have the most recent
versions from apt-get. The redhat 9 box has the rawhide rpms of
spamassa
On Sat, Sep 06, 2003 at 08:04:22PM -0700, Scott wrote:
> My redhat 8 box with courier and spamassassin doesn't have sa-learn
> included in the rpm. All three of my test boxes below have the most recent
> versions from apt-get. The redhat 9 box has the rawhide rpms of
> spamassassin. However, t
Hello Bill,
Saturday, September 6, 2003, 5:46:29 PM, you wrote:
RM>> All spam is then kept to be used as part of our corpus. Our spam
RM>> corpus is nearing 20k messages -- we'll probably start deleting the
RM>> oldest spam shortly.
BP> Here's a newbie question for you:
BP> When you say "used
My redhat 8 box with courier and spamassassin doesn't have sa-learn included
in the rpm. All three of my test boxes below have the most recent versions
from apt-get. The redhat 9 box has the rawhide rpms of spamassassin.
However, they require libcrypto.so.4 which isn't available to redhat 8 af
Soeren Gerlach writes:
> > On Fri, Sep 05, 2003 at 08:55:26PM +0200, Soeren Gerlach wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > > Changes since 2.5x:
> > > > [...]
> > > > - new Bayes tweaks -- tokenization of partial address and URI elements
> > >
> > > Are details available about this feature?
> >
> > Basicall
I'm running 2.55 SA with spamass-milter.
I have lots of spam that's targeted to mailinglist addresses. The people
on those lists never see it because the list prevents nonsubscribers from
posting. But the mail does get accepted by sendmail before the list
manager (in this case Majordomo2) bounc
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Robert
Menschel
Sent: Friday, September 05, 2003 8:25 PM
To: Phil N
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [SAtalk] FW: Feedback on how identified spam is being handled
> All spam is then kept to be used as part
thanks to shafer and apthorpe. reconciling their suggestions, I changed
/etc/procmailrc to:
VERBOSE=YES
LOGFILE=$HOME/procmail.log
:0fw
| /usr/bin/spamc -u $LOGNAME
:0:
* ^X-Spam-Status: Yes #If the X-Spam header is Yes
$HOME/mail/SPAM #send it to ~/mail/SPAM, which must exist.
BUT: that
On Sunday 07 September 2003 00:08 CET Artur Pydo wrote:
> I found that it would be very nice/usefull to manually set
> _HOSTNAME_ tag if the "public" MX hostname running
> Spamassassin is different of the one we can get from
> 'hostname'.
Please file a bug with severity "enhancement" on bugzilla.s
On Sat, 6 Sep 2003, Bob Apthorpe wrote:
> I use:
>
> :0fw: spamc.lock
> * !^X-spam-status:[ ]*Yes
> * < 10
> | /usr/bin/spamc -d localhost -p 783 -u apthorpe
>
> The lock file (the ': spamc.lock' part of ':0fw: spamc.lock') keeps you
> from invoking more than one spamc at a time to keep
On Sat, Sep 06, 2003 at 12:29:00PM -0500, Matthew Edward Porter wrote:
> After testing, I am convinced this has something to do with running spam
> assassin in daemon mode. (Not a problem with SA, my configuration). Here
> is the command I am using to start the daemon:
>
> /usr/bin/spamd --debug
Can I throw in my 2 pennies worth.
I'm starting to receive the following bastardised words in spam
h0t
gir1s
li.ve
C~um Suc`king
Free [EMAIL PROTECTED]
c.um
c0ck
and more
OK so I've added rules to try and catch them but they keep coming up
with new variants.
Cheers
Nigel
On Fri, 5 Sep 2003 15:2
I know it's been a couple weeks since I asked the question, but I wanted
to thank those of you who responded. I ended up writing a shell script
(example included below). I run it every day in a cron job.
Yeah I know it's not perfect but it's a good place to start. The main
thing was being remin
On Sat, 6 Sep 2003 12:11:13 -0700 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> RH9 with kernel 2.4.20-19.9, spamassassin-2.44-11.8.x via procmail
>
> Using Linux Bible and recipes I googled, I'm trying to set up SpamAssassin to
> tag and redirect spam into the user's ~/mail/SPAM file, which I created. I've
> tried
At Sat Sep 6 20:11:13 2003, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> First, I put in /etc/procmailrc:
>
> :0fw
> | /usr/bin/spamc
>
> And in the user's ~/.procmailrc, I tried:
>
> :0:
> *
> X-Spam-Flag: YES
> $HOME/mail/SPAM
You've got the syntax wrong -- the asterisk (*) is supposed to be on
the same line
Hello,
I'm currently running Spamassassin release v. 2.60-rc3.
I found that it would be very nice/usefull to manually set
_HOSTNAME_ tag if the "public" MX hostname running
Spamassassin is different of the one we can get from
'hostname'.
It would be nice to put the following line in local.cf
to a
Sorry for the confusion. When I posted the original question, I cut and pasted the
contents of my /etc/procmailrc from a wiki page where I had it stored, and the format
accidentally got changed. My /etc/procmailrc was actually correct all along, and
contains:
MAILDIR=$HOME/mail
:0fw
| /usr/bin/
On Wed, Aug 27, 2003 at 01:29:52AM +0100, Yorkshire Dave wrote:
> > 0=
0=Q
--
Randomly Generated Tagline:
It's not easy to juggle a pregnant wife and a troubled child, but
somehow I managed to squeeze in 8 hours of TV a day.
-- Homer Simpson
Lisa's First Wor
On Sat, Sep 06, 2003 at 03:06:29PM -0400, Forrest Aldrich wrote:
> And I'm not certain that these files are actually being used by SA. The
> bayse_msgcount, for example, hasn't been update for days. The update on
msgcount won't be used in 2.60. in fact, when you first try to write to
the ba
Interesting, thanks. But this didn't occur. And again, since I'm not
seeing the actual databases being updated (toks, etc), I'm presuming that
SA has a config issue.I have a lot of regular email flowing through the
system, so those databases should have been updated since the actual
upda
RH9 with kernel 2.4.20-19.9, spamassassin-2.44-11.8.x via procmail
Using Linux Bible and recipes I googled, I'm trying to set up SpamAssassin to tag and
redirect spam into the user's ~/mail/SPAM file, which I created. I've tried the
following, but spam is still getting passed through even though
I followed the directions you gave, and now have in /var/spool/spamassassin:
-rw-r--r-- 1 root wheel 1633 Aug 29 11:30 bayes_msgcount
-rw--- 1 root wheel 630784 Sep 5 22:32 bayes_seen
-rw--- 1 root wheel 2809856 Sep 5 22:32 bayes_toks
-rw-r--r-- 1 root wheel 630784 Sep
I've recently integrated a third-party program into SpamAssassin. I found
the best way to do this (in my case) was to create a program to run the 3rd
party app, take the results and add them into a X-Header and append to the
message. Using SA it's simple to create a rule based on X-headers. This
Yorkshire Dave <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > a=d
> > b=O
> > c=,
> > d=9
> > e=F
> > f=_
> > g=
> > h=$
> > i=[
> > j=u
> > k=@
> > l=S
> > m=z
> > n=8
> > o=s
> > p=
>
> p=|
>
> > q=
> > r=A
> > s==
> > t=3
> > u=n
> > v=N
> > w=?
> > x=
x=*
> > y=R
> > z=
> > 0=
> > 1=
> > 2=
> > 3=
> > 4=
After testing, I am convinced this has something to do with running spam
assassin in daemon mode. (Not a problem with SA, my configuration). Here
is the command I am using to start the daemon:
/usr/bin/spamd --debug -x -L -u spamc
The spamc user does exist and its home directory is /opt/spamass
> On Fri, Sep 05, 2003 at 08:55:26PM +0200, Soeren Gerlach wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > > Changes since 2.5x:
> > > [...]
> > > - new Bayes tweaks -- tokenization of partial address and URI elements
> >
> > Are details available about this feature?
>
> Basically URIs are broken into
> - hostname
> - "wo
On Sat, 6 Sep 2003 06:18:45 -0600 (MDT), you wrote:
>
> The biggest issue with Red Hat 9 is that they ship with a SA of
>version 2.44. This works but not perfect. And I wanted sa-learn and
>learned it is only on version 2.50 and up. So I got the RPM version of
>SA which is version 2.523 o
The biggest issue with Red Hat 9 is that they ship with a SA of
version 2.44. This works but not perfect. And I wanted sa-learn and
learned it is only on version 2.50 and up. So I got the RPM version of
SA which is version 2.523 or like that and it includes a RPM of perl
tools needed b
Quoting "Malte S. Stretz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Saturday 06 September 2003 03:26 CET [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/# spamassassin --version
> > SpamAssassin version 2.60-rc3-mss2
> >
> > Perl version:
> > 5.006001
> >[...]
> > That is odd, because:
> >
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
34 matches
Mail list logo
