On Fri, 6 Jun 2003 07:49:56 -0700
"Gary Funck" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Question: what are the advantages of using bmf over using SA's
> built-in Bayes support?
Because bmf, as it do only bayesian filtering, is faster than SA, but
the main reason is that I'm looking for a good configuration =
> From: sandolo
> Sent: Friday, June 06, 2003 6:17 AM
>
> I choose to rename the spamassassin's header and all seems to work fine
That's good. I'd recommend that you also file a bug report on bmf's development
site, indicating that they are not properly rewriting the X-Spam-Status header,
by ign
Your note didn't clearly say what exactly is wrong with the headers
that you're seeing. Is it that the X-Spam-Status heeader is screwed up?
If that's the case, the probably `bmf' (see
http://sourceforge.net/projects/bmf/) is messing things up, when you call it
with the -p switch. I don't know how
On Thu, 5 Jun 2003 13:12:49 -0700
"Gary Funck" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I choose to rename the spamassassin's header and all seems to work fine
:)
Thanks for your suggestions
greets
sand
--
[ [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://autistici.org/sandolo/ ]
[ "Non sono disordinato. Sono solo u
Hi, I've tried to use both spamassassin and bmf in my .procmailrc to do
the filtering, buth I got corrupted headers like this:
Message-Id:
Subject: bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla
bla .. tests=PGP_SIGNATURE,QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT,USER_AGENT
autolearn=ham versio
