Theo Van Dinter wrote on Thu, 19 Jun 2003 13:22:58 -0400:
> I don't think we sort either, so the report order should be the order
> of the test listing which should be the order in which the hits were made.
>
No, test order really is alphabetical, at least here.
Kai
--
Kai Schätzl, Berlin, G
On Thu, Jun 19, 2003 at 01:43:15PM -0400, Chris Santerre wrote:
> bunch of rawbody rules. Does SA go thru my local.cf and run all the header
> rules first, or just top down? If top down, is there an order that would
> give better performance?
SA goes through rule types seperately. in no specific
> -Original Message-
> From: Theo Van Dinter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, June 19, 2003 1:23 PM
> To: Chris Santerre
> Cc: Spamassassin-Talk (E-mail)
> Subject: Re: [SAtalk] Question on XSPAM report in header.
>
>
> On Thu, Jun 19, 2003
On Thu, Jun 19, 2003 at 01:04:17PM -0400, Chris Santerre wrote:
> When the test are shown in the header, they are in alphabetical order. But
> the Report doesn't seem to be in any order that I can figure out. How does
> SA decide which rule description order listed in the report ?
I don't think we
When the test are shown in
the header, they are in alphabetical order. But the Report doesn't seem to be in
any order that I can figure out. How does SA decide which rule description order
listed in the report ?
Just wondering
:)
Chris SanterreSystem Admin"A little nonsense now and
then,
