Re: [SAtalk] Spam Phrases Scores Broken?

2002-07-09 Thread Erik B. Berry
Bart Schaefer wrote: > Works for me (output from spamc): > > X-Spam-Status: Yes, hits=10.0 required=5.0 > tests=SUBJ_ENDS_IN_Q_MARK,SUBJ_REMOVE,KIFF,CLICK_BELOW, > FREQ_SPAM_PHRASE,SPAM_PHRASES_020,SPAM_PHRASES_100 > version=2.31 ^^^

[SAtalk] Spam Phrases Scores Broken?

2002-07-08 Thread Erik B. Berry
I have noticed that the rules SPAM_PHRASES_020 and SPAM_PHRASES_040 don't seem to work anymore in 2.31. FREQ_SPAM_PHRASE works fine. For example, this message will score over 20 but not get the corresponding SPAM_PHRASES_020 rule marked in the header. Spam phrases follow: temple kiff kathman

[SAtalk] One That Got Through

2002-02-26 Thread Erik B. Berry
It seems the SA 2.01 rules missed the unique ID in the subject and body here, as well as the removal instructions. Maybe this points to possibilities for spam phrases for things like "viagra pharmacy", "no hassle", "reasonable prices", "fast delivery", "check out the site", "highest quality"?

Re: [SAtalk] Installing as Non-root User

2002-02-22 Thread Erik B. Berry
Craig Hughes wrote: > Sorry about that, I used to be much better about not using // and only > /**/, precisely for cc compatibility. I'll go through and fix all the This seems fixed in the latest CVS now. There are some unrelated compilation warnings, in case they are worth fixing: cc -O sp

[SAtalk] Installing as Non-root User

2002-02-16 Thread Erik B. Berry
I've managed to make/compile the 2.01 release under SunOS 5.7, after changing the compiler to gcc from cc (cc doesn't like C++ // comments in C files). Now, what is the recommended way to begin using SpamAssassin for my personal account only without a "make install", since that requires root pr