Hi,
> On 24 January 2004 14:29 +0100 Arpi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > After upgrading chichekpox to Version 1.11, spamassassin --lint fails
> > on every server i tried (spamassassin 2.62, perl 5.8.2).
>
> Fixed in version 1.14 (which
Hi,
> did I get booted off the list, no list traffic or is sourceforge down?
> I haven't gotten anything really since friday
it's just SF again...
The address to which the message has not yet been delivered is:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Delay reason: SMTP error from remote mailer after end
Hi,
After upgrading chichekpox to Version 1.11, spamassassin --lint fails on
every server i tried (spamassassin 2.62, perl 5.8.2).
i've tried re-downloading many times, no change, the error is still there:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ spamassassin --lint
Failed to compile body SpamAssassin tests, skippin
Hi,
> On Mon, Jan 19, 2004 at 03:21:06PM -0500, Larry Gilson wrote:
> > http://useast.spamassassin.org/doc/Mail_SpamAssassin_Conf.html#learning%20op
> > tions
> >
> > bayes_ignore_header header_name
>
> ::bangs head on wall:: How did I miss *that*? Thanks for correcting
> my careless reading.
Hi,
> Correct. The only set going through frequent revisions right now is
> "Chickenpox". I think I'm about to post a revision on Backhair/Popcorn,
> but that will be the first change in months. Still, they will not go
i've found a major problem with blachhair set today: it catches most of
the
Hi,
> Correct. The only set going through frequent revisions right now is
> "Chickenpox". I think I'm about to post a revision on Backhair/Popcorn,
> but that will be the first change in months. Still, they will not go
i've found a major problem with blachhair set today: it catches most of
the
Hi,
I've transferred our rather big common bayes db collected (and trained)
on a linux mail gateway server over months, to a freebsd 4.7 system,
with spamassassin 2.55 (the linux server ran 2.53).
But when i try to sa-learn, i get:
$ sa-learn --rebuild
Cannot open bayes_path /var/amavis/.spamass
Hi,
> > i'vs just uploaded the current snapshot of my version to:
> > ftp://ftp.mplayerhq.hu/spamassassin-c_0.2.tar.gz
> >
> > it is not usable in production yet - it is full of timers
> > and debug stuff, for testing and benchmarking purposes.
>
> I've uploaded a version based on the above sour
Hi,
> The only argument I'm making is against the preconceived notion that a
> program in C is always faster than the same program in perl.
agree. there are good c programmers and bad c programmers.
good ones know how to write fast c code - bad ones don't.
good ones usually thinking in lowlevel a
Hi,
> I will add the code to the CVS and put a mark that is still beta code.
where should i send the updates later?
i mean i see no sense of having it in your cvs, while the developed version
is here...
> If someone is decided to hack it a bit more, then they will be welcome
> to do it.
do you
Hi,
> On Sat, 11 May 2002, Mail Admin wrote:
> > Hi, I want to use spamassassin on a system where real heavy load
> > exists. I have 540,000 incoming emails daily. I know spamc/spamd do
> > well under moderate load , but this is not enough. Did anybody think
> > of rewriting spammassasin in C,
>
Hi,
>
>To be erased from our list please write [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>with "erased" in the subject line
>
>
>
> It seems like this particular spammer is "erasing" instead
Hi,
> On 27 February 2002, Craig R Hughes said:
> >181 98 83 RATWARE
>
> That's interesting. I wonder if the RATWARE regex is too broad --
> perhaps if it were toned down a bit, it would be better focussed on
> spam. This ought to be a well-focused rule; how many peo
Hi,
> Sorry, that should be
>
> More generic:
>
> pid=`ps ax | grep "spamd" | grep -v grep | awk '{print $1}'`
pid=`pidof spamd` ?
A'rpi / Astral & ESP-team
--
Developer of MPlayer, the Movie Player for Linux - http://www.MPlayerHQ.hu
___
Spamas
Hi,
> On Thu, 2002-02-21 at 13:42, Arpi wrote:
> > when will it be implemented, or better: when will you accept such patch fo
> r
> > ruleset? (i cannot modify the perl code, as i don't know the perl languege
> > nor the spamassassin core enough, but i could help m
Hi,
> On 21 February 2002, Craig Hughes said:
> > I had been thinking about creating a "multiple-rule" format for rules,
> > where in order to match a rule, you would have to match a sequence of
> > regexes, eg:
> >
> > rawbody ASCII_FORM_ENTRY /_{30,}/
> > and rawbody ASCII_FORM_ENTRY /[
Hi,
> I had been thinking about creating a "multiple-rule" format for rules,
> where in order to match a rule, you would have to match a sequence of
> regexes, eg:
>
> rawbody ASCII_FORM_ENTRY /_{30,}/
> and rawbody ASCII_FORM_ENTRY /[^<][A-Za-z][A-Za-z]+.{1,15}?\s+_{30,}/
>
> the "and"
Hi,
> > > rawbody ASCII_FORM_ENTRY/[^<][A-Za-z][A-Za-z]+.{1,15}?\s+_{30,}/
> > [^<] means "any character except '<'".
> anyway, it explains why is this regexp so slow :(
> it partially matches at every character position of text, and only at the
> end (_{30,}) turns out that bad match..
Hi,
> On Thu, 21 Feb 2002, Arpi wrote:
>
> > rawbody ASCII_FORM_ENTRY/[^<][A-Za-z][A-Za-z]+.{1,15}?\s+_{30,}/
> >
> > could someone please explain what does [^<] matches ?
> > afaik ^ means beginning-of-line but it's strange in [] character arr
Hi,
> I've ran my C version through your really big spam collection at night, and
> filtered out 'slow' messages. Then I've checked which regexps makes them so
> slow (slow mean 5..25 secs/mail on p4 1.8ghz).
more on this...
> FOR_INSTANT_ACCESS:
> /(?:CLICK HERE|).{0,20}\s+INSTANT\s+ACCESS.{0,
Hi,
I've ran my C version through your really big spam collection at night, and
filtered out 'slow' messages. Then I've checked which regexps makes them so
slow (slow mean 5..25 secs/mail on p4 1.8ghz).
Most 'slow' mails have many (>1000) repeats of a single char
(X...XXX
Hi,
> > Razor's trivial to re-do in C. Simply use DNS - allow people to lookup
> > md5sum.razor.org (or whatever the domain is to be) and map the Razor db to
> > a DNS db. Use DJBDNS, it's trivial. Really incredibly trivial.
> The biggest problem with razor at present is the lack of vetting of
>
Hi,
> > For the perl version, spamd+spamc solution (i would call it a messy
> > hack) is a workaround for perl's 'booting/startup' overload.
> It's really not so messy of a hack, and it's designed for a couple
> purposes:
>
> 1. work around perl's 'booting/startup' overload (though this would b
Hi,
> I think what would be a lot more interesting is spamd in C or C++. The
> major benefit I can think of of going to C is performance (though I'm
> not necessarily convinced you'll beat perl for doing text processing),
> and if performance is what you care about, you'll be wanting to use
> sp
Hi,
> > There are many pros and contras to C version, i won't list these, it's on
> > your fantasy.
>
> I can imagine a few of them, but am curious what you are thinking of as
> the pros and cons.
ok...
pros:
- portability (on unix platforms)
- much better speed (on my test p3 perl version with
Hi,
I'm working on a partial rewrite of SpamAssassin in plain C language, using
the PCRE library for regexp matching.
Thanks to the nice ruleset format, it is able to parse and use the .cf files
without any change. Currently only regexps are parsed and checked, but i'll
implement the most importa
26 matches
Mail list logo
