Re: [SAtalk] 2.60 Upgrade - SpamD not using trained bayes databas e

2003-10-03 Thread Theo Van Dinter
On Fri, Oct 03, 2003 at 09:53:46AM -0500, Smart,Dan wrote: > perl-DB_File-1.75-36.1.73 > Not sure how to check the libdb version, but I'm on RH 7.3 then you shouldn't have any problems, I have the exact same setup. BTW: $ rpm -qa | grep ^db db3-3.3.11-6 db3-devel-3.3.11-6 db1-1.85-8 db2-devel-2.

RE: [SAtalk] 2.60 Upgrade - SpamD not using trained bayes databas e

2003-10-03 Thread Smart,Dan
Subject: Re: [SAtalk] 2.60 Upgrade - SpamD not using trained | bayes databas e | | On Fri, Oct 03, 2003 at 09:53:46AM -0500, Smart,Dan wrote: | > perl-DB_File-1.75-36.1.73 | > Not sure how to check the libdb version, but I'm on RH 7.3 | | then you shouldn't have any problems, I have th

RE: [SAtalk] 2.60 Upgrade - SpamD not using trained bayes databas e

2003-10-03 Thread Smart,Dan
| -Original Message- | From: Theo Van Dinter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] | Sent: Friday, October 03, 2003 9:42 AM | | nothing from the SA side. if your libdb/DB_File is out of | date, you may want to update them. perl-DB_File-1.75-36.1.73 Not sure how to check the libdb version, but

Re: [SAtalk] 2.60 Upgrade - SpamD not using trained bayes databas e

2003-10-03 Thread Theo Van Dinter
On Fri, Oct 03, 2003 at 09:39:17AM -0500, Smart,Dan wrote: > Here are the sizes of the source. Yes they are big, but I wouldn't think > 30,000 messages would be to huge for bayes. Is this not correct? 3 is small, no problem. > 1. Do I need to feed it less spam to initialize? up to you. >

RE: [SAtalk] 2.60 Upgrade - SpamD not using trained bayes databas e

2003-10-03 Thread Smart,Dan
nk of? <> | -Original Message- | From: Theo Van Dinter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] | Sent: Friday, October 03, 2003 8:39 AM | To: Smart,Dan | Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Subject: Re: [SAtalk] 2.60 Upgrade - SpamD not using trained | bayes databas e | | On Fri, Oct 03, 2003 at 08:33:06AM -0500, Smar

Re: [SAtalk] 2.60 Upgrade - SpamD not using trained bayes databas e

2003-10-03 Thread Theo Van Dinter
On Fri, Oct 03, 2003 at 08:33:06AM -0500, Smart,Dan wrote: > Could the database size have caused all my learned spam/ham to be > eliminated? I noticed that the database looks like: > -rw-rw-rw-1 filter filter4718592 Oct 3 08:21 .spamassassin_seen > -rw-rw-rw-1 filter filter 5885

RE: [SAtalk] 2.60 Upgrade - SpamD not using trained bayes databas e

2003-10-03 Thread Smart,Dan
| -Original Message- | From: Theo Van Dinter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] | Sent: Thursday, October 02, 2003 9:13 AM | | Just to check: are you learning to journal, and did you sync | the journal before "dump magic"? I'm not sure I understand your question. If you are asking if I tried a

RE: [SAtalk] 2.60 Upgrade - SpamD not using trained bayes databas e

2003-10-03 Thread Smart,Dan
| -Original Message- | From: Theo Van Dinter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] | Sent: Thursday, October 02, 2003 9:13 AM | Just to check: are you learning to journal, and did you sync | the journal before "dump magic"? Could the database size have caused all my learned spam/ham to be eliminated

Re: [SAtalk] 2.60 Upgrade - SpamD not using trained bayes databas e

2003-10-02 Thread Theo Van Dinter
On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 08:50:47AM -0500, Smart,Dan wrote: > That worked. I did a --forget for both ham and spam files then relearned > them. > Now the --dump magic looks right. Thanks for the suggestions. > > Mission control, I think we have a problem here... Just to check: are you learning t

RE: [SAtalk] 2.60 Upgrade - SpamD not using trained bayes databas e

2003-10-02 Thread Smart,Dan
M | To: Bart Schaefer; [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Subject: RE: [SAtalk] 2.60 Upgrade - SpamD not using trained | bayes databas e | | Bart, | Thanks for the reply. Will try the process you propose, and | get rid of the timepath statement, since timing is now gone from SA. | | <> | | | -Orig

RE: [SAtalk] 2.60 Upgrade - SpamD not using trained bayes databas e

2003-10-01 Thread Smart,Dan
ubject: RE: [SAtalk] 2.60 Upgrade - SpamD not using trained | bayes databas e | | On Tue, 30 Sep 2003, Smart,Dan wrote: | | > For whatever reason, SA does not think I have any ham. Yet | when I run | > sa-learn --ham I get: | > | > debug: Failed to parse line in SpamAssa

RE: [SAtalk] 2.60 Upgrade - SpamD not using trained bayes databas e

2003-09-30 Thread Smart,Dan
esday, September 30, 2003 10:19 AMTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: RE: [SAtalk] 2.60 Upgrade - SpamD not using trained bayes databas e Got a direct email suggesting that the wrong config file may be being used (thanks F. Goudal).  Here's the full spamd -D transcript.  Note I've tr

RE: [SAtalk] 2.60 Upgrade - SpamD not using trained bayes databas e

2003-09-30 Thread Bart Schaefer
On Tue, 30 Sep 2003, Smart,Dan wrote: > For whatever reason, SA does not think I have any ham. Yet when I run > sa-learn --ham I get: > > debug: Failed to parse line in SpamAssassin configuration, skipping: > timelog_path /tmp/satiming That worries me a little. I think it'll stop SA from rea

RE: [SAtalk] 2.60 Upgrade - SpamD not using trained bayes databas e

2003-09-30 Thread Smart,Dan
er pid: 19659logmsg: server started on port 783/tcp (running version 2.60) snip   Its not a config file issue. From: Smart,Dan Sent: Tuesday, September 30, 2003 8:22 AMTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: RE: [SAtalk] 2.60 Upgrade - SpamD not using trained bayes databas e

RE: [SAtalk] 2.60 Upgrade - SpamD not using trained bayes databas e

2003-09-30 Thread Smart,Dan
Title: Blank Stationery A little more info:  Just upgrade from SA 2.55 to 2.60.  I've got everything working except for SPAMD not using the Bayes database.  I need help debugging.   I run this on RH 7.3 with Postfix and Procmail   <> From: Smart,Dan Sent: Monday, September 29, 200