This ended up being a local firewall issue that I have resolved. Thanks
for looking.
At 10:21 AM 1/28/2004, James Ervin wrote:
I have two mail servers running spamassassin. One has spamd running and uses:
# send mail through spamassassin
:0fw
| /usr/bin/spamc
This works and I get a nice log in
Robin Lynn Frank wrote:
> I rummaged around the web site looking for material on invoking spamc with
> maildrop, but didn't find anything.
>
> Can someone point me to any documentation on this, or just give me a clue as
> to what must be done in .mailfilter to invoke spamc?
>
This is what I us
> I rummaged around the web site looking for material on invoking spamc with
> maildrop, but didn't find anything.
> Can someone point me to any documentation on this, or just give me a clue as
> to what must be done in .mailfilter to invoke spamc?
xfilter "spamc"
same thing you'd use for invok
On Wed, 31 Dec 2003, Robert Menschel wrote:
> Check
> http://www.spamassassin.org/doc/Mail_SpamAssassin_Conf.html#privileged%20settings
> specifically the allow_user_rules setting. If you don't allow user_prefs
> rules, then no spamd/spamc execution will use them.
>
> DE> I thought perhaps spamc/s
Hello Daniel,
Tuesday, December 30, 2003, 1:28:29 PM, you wrote:
DE> I recently added some personal rules to my user_prefs and tested them
DE> by running a few mail messages through spamassassin. They seem to
DE> work fine, but I'm still getting the spam and the rules aren't getting
DE> trigger
On Tue, Dec 30, 2003 at 04:28:29PM -0500, Daniel Ellard wrote:
> I thought perhaps spamc/spamd wasn't looking at my user_prefs, but
> this doesn't seem to the problem -- my whitelist and blacklist entries
> still are working as always. The only flags to spamd are -d and -L,
> so I don't see a prob
You could use procmail to call spamc, eg. .qmail-user files look like this:
| preline procmail -t -p ./the_users_name_here/Maildir/procmailrc
and the user's procmailrc:
LOGFILE=/var/log/procmail
VERBOSE=ON
### Spam Assassin
:0fw
* < 256000
| /usr/bin/spamc -u the_users_name_here -f
:0
*
./th
On Fri, 12 Dec 2003, Raquel Rice wrote:
> I've tried several times to run spamc from a site-wide procmailrc.
> It just hangs. This is what I have in the /etc/procmailrc:
>
> :0fw
> * < 256000
> | spamc
>
> and I've made certain to have started spamd.
You don't say how
At 02:26 PM 12/1/2003, Douglas Kirkland wrote:
I am confused about how the -d setting works in spamc. Can I set two
different domains for the domain setting in spamc without using DNS for the
two spamd servers?
I was think I could have the setting like:
spamc -d primary.spamd.com, secondary.spamd
At 04:12 PM 12/1/2003, Douglas Kirkland wrote:
If i understand this now. By using DNS then one server will be used for the
most of the time because it will want to use the IP address that it got from
the first lookup of the DNS address?
adding -H will cause it to randomize the order of the result
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Monday 01 December 2003 12:54, Matt Kettler wrote:
> At 02:26 PM 12/1/2003, Douglas Kirkland wrote:
> >I am confused about how the -d setting works in spamc. Can I set two
> >different domains for the domain setting in spamc without using DNS for t
Please remember not to post in HTML.
"Fred I-IS.COM" wrote:
> ---cut---
> When spamd receives a connection, it spawns a child to handle the
> request. The child will expect to read an email message from the
> network socket, which should then be closed for writing on the other
to run as qmailq.
-Jeremy
-Original Message-
From: AltGrendel [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, August 25, 2003 8:19 AM
To: SA-Talk
Subject: Re: [SAtalk] spamc/spamd question on a qmail gateway
On Sat, 2003-08-23 at 04:44, Joe Cave wrote:
> Dear list,
> I'm having some p
On Sat, 2003-08-23 at 04:44, Joe Cave wrote:
> Dear list,
> I'm having some problems getting spamc/spamd working on a qmail gateway. I'm
> wondering what is the most lightweight way to get mail scanned and then re-injected
> back into the qmail-queue? I have qmail patched to work with the QMAILQU
Hi,
I reported the same problem some day ago ("Difference between Spamc and
spamassassin on Win32") but did not get a reply. I think it's a small
change to spamc only.
Klaus
---
This SF.Net email sponsored by: Free pre-built ASP.NET sites inc
Hi,
I reported the same problem some day ago ("Difference between Spamc and
spamassassin on Win32") but did not get a reply. I think it's a small
change only.
Klaus
---
This SF.Net email sponsored by: Free pre-built ASP.NET sites including
Da
> -Original Message-
> From: Dave Sill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2003 10:17 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [SAtalk] spamc/spamd not checking all messages
>
> I use:
>
> #!/bin/sh
>
> exec /usr/local/bin/softli
"Dallas L. Engelken" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>Dave Sill wrote:
>>
>> What's happening is that some spam (~5-10/day out of 60-70)
>> is not being checked correctly by spamd. For example, an
>> obvious spam contains the header field:
>>
>> X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0 required=0
>
> why not ru
> -Original Message-
> From: Dave Sill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, July 30, 2003 8:03 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: [SAtalk] spamc/spamd not checking all messages
>
>
> I'm using 2.55 under Red Hat 8 and qmail with qmail-scanner-1.16. I
> *think* this problem sta
On Wed, 2003-07-30 at 09:02, Dave Sill wrote:
> I'm using 2.55 under Red Hat 8 and qmail with qmail-scanner-1.16. I
> *think* this problem started when I upgraded to 2.55 from 2.50, but
> I'm not sure. I'm using nearly the same configuration at home and not
> seeing this problem.
>
> What's happen
14, 2003 4:30
AM
To: Tony Bunce;
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [SAtalk] Spamc on
remote host
Never thought about
that... only tested when the host was up. However, I only get a 10-12 second
timeout now when testing against a downed IP. I'm then running the spamc
service in a po
fferent version since you get 4 lines on
one spamc session, while my setup only logs two lines.
Thomas
-Original Message-From: Tony Bunce
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Friday, July 11, 2003 5:34
PMTo: Thomas Nilsen;
[EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: RE: [SAtalk] Spamc
on remote host
?
513.934.2800
1.888.ON.GO.YET
-Original Message-
From: Thomas Nilsen
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, July
11, 2003 11:26 AM
To: Tony Bunce
Subject: RE: [SAtalk] Spamc on
remote host
Use the timeout switch
when calling spamc. Mail will then be delivered as normal, but
Hi,
On Mon, 16 Jun 2003 10:26:28 +0200 Buscema Guido
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm trying to set up spamc/spamd with postfix by piping a shell script
> inside master.cf file of postfix.
> I created a user "filter" and a directory /var/spool/filter.
> I also created a directory ( /opt/
- Original Message -
From: "Dr. Ongo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Spam Assassin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2003 11:08 AM
Subject: [SAtalk] spamc/spamd per user config files
> Hello
>
> I'm using the spamc/spamd combo with postfix as an inbound relay.
> Postfix runs spamc
Stuart Gall wrote:
Where did you get that idea ?
spamc respects the user_prefs and local.cf files.
The only issue might be if you want user based configuration and you are running spamc
as mail or something
but this should be configureable on the MTA.
Oh. The docs (which I don't have in front of
Rick Macdougall wrote on Tue, 7 Jan 2003 11:57:12 -0500:
> spamc has no such restriction. All that needs to be done is increase the
> size of the field in the MySQL database. We use it here with great success.
>
Thanks for both answers. So, this means, 1. MailCorral is the culprit handing
over
> FYI, works just fine. We've deployed it here using the full email as
> the key. We just made the field longer.
hmm, maybe I'll have to look into this. shouldn't be too hard to add
courier auth tool support to spamd so I wouldn't have to set up a
separate mysql database for this kind of thing.
Original Message-
> From: Rick Macdougall [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 07, 2003 10:57 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [SAtalk] spamc and homedir
>
>
> Hi,
>
> spamc has no such restriction. All that needs to be done is
> increase
sday, January 07, 2003 10:32 AM
Subject: Re: [SAtalk] spamc and homedir
Justin Mason wrote on Mon, 06 Jan 2003 21:49:50 +:
> there are some patches now in the CVS version which do a lot of stuff with
> virtual users; might be worth taking a look.
>
I'm not too eager checking ou
Justin Mason wrote on Mon, 06 Jan 2003 21:49:50 +:
> there are some patches now in the CVS version which do a lot of stuff with
> virtual users; might be worth taking a look.
>
I'm not too eager checking out the CVS version :-)
I think I have a similar problem with SA as Chris encountered. SA
Chris,
there are some patches now in the CVS version which do a lot of stuff with
virtual users; might be worth taking a look.
--j.
---
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Welcome to geek heaven.
http://thinkgeek.com/sf
__
On 2002-12-31 10:50:57 -0500, Dan Schwartz wrote:
> :0fw
:0fw: spamc.lock
> * < 10
> | spamc
Otherwise each mail will spawn a new instance of procmail and
spamc immediately. That means 100 instances if 100 mails arrive
at a time. Makes for a nice DOS. :-)
Best regards
Martin
--
> Now that works pretty fine, but if one of the users has exceeded his disk
> quota, then the SPAMc process and procmail hang indefinitely, pulling
> ressources like mad.
Correction / Update: The SPAMc & Procmail processes hang for 5 minutes and
then they die. However, the SPAMd process which als
Based on the output I assume you must be running 2.50-cvs, since 2.43 would
not support multiple hosts in this manner.
And since this is new code in a CVS, not too surprising that it might have
a bug However, taking a casual look at the libspamc.c from the latest
CVS snapshot on
http://spa
> That's a *huge* difference. It shouldn't be my internet connection as it
> is pretty good.
>
> I have seen other posts mentioning really slow times. Any thoughts?
I have the same problem here. I updated from SA 2.31 to 2.43 recently and
installed Razor2 v2.20 in addition (2.31 was working wi
On Wed, Oct 30, 2002 at 01:23:23PM -0800, Kaleb Pederson wrote:
> I have seen other posts mentioning really slow times. Any thoughts?
>
Network timeouts, ie your internet connection is flaky in some way.
---
Lars Hansson
---
This sf.net emai
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, 30 Oct 2002, Kaleb Pederson wrote:
> However, if I use -a -c -L as a parameter I get:
>
> spamd[29034]: [info] setuid to kibab succeeded
> spamd[29034]: [processing message for kibab] 1000,
> expecting 4656 bytes.
> spamd[29034]: [identified
On Wed, Oct 16, 2002 at 11:23:10AM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> This leads me to a question. Is there a way to tell SA to ignore (and
> possibly overwrite) all conflicting header lines like X-Spam-Status? That
It does already. SA removed the X-Spam-* headers before scanning.
This actually
On Wed, 16 Oct 2002, Theo Van Dinter wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 16, 2002 at 09:47:52AM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > So, why did I get SpamAssassin headers when I didn't have spamd running?
>
> The answer is that it's being scanned elsewhere. For instance, I
> receive mails (currently ~4% of my
On Wed, Oct 16, 2002 at 09:47:52AM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> So, why did I get SpamAssassin headers when I didn't have spamd running?
The answer is that it's being scanned elsewhere. For instance, I
receive mails (currently ~4% of my mail per month) that already have a
X-Spam-Status head
So, why did I get SpamAssassin headers when I didn't have spamd running?
Patrick
Original Message
From: Theo Van Dinter
Date: Wed 10/16/02 9:38
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [SAtalk] spamc && !
On Wed, Oct 16, 2002 at 08:57:32AM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> It's version 2.42 of SA. When I went back and checked, spamd was not running. So if
> it's spawning a spamd, it's not leaving it hanging around.
spamc does not spawn spamd. spamc tries to connect to the port, if
there's nothing
TECTED]
Subject: RE: [SAtalk] spamc && !spamd
What version are you running. I have had somthing like this cripple my
server as EVERY message caused a new spamd to startup (under 1.41) I have
not yet upgraded to 1.42 or even 1.43 i have just seen so i have not seen if
this goes away.
Robin
hrauder
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: [SAtalk] Spamc/spamd setup with Postfix
>
>
> I guess I forgot to say that it's on a mail-relay, which is
> supposed to scan the mail, and not deliver locally.
>
> So what I basically need, is the way to apply a contentfilte
er works on a mail-gateway.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Mike Schrauder [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: 7. oktober 2002 22:20
> To: Nicolai Strøm Gylling
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: [SAtalk] Spamc/spamd setup with Postfix
>
>
> I have it work
virus-scanner works on a mail-gateway.
-Original Message-
From: Mike Schrauder [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: 7. oktober 2002 22:20
To: Nicolai Strøm Gylling
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [SAtalk] Spamc/spamd setup with Postfix
I have it working here, but I am not a linux person and ca
I have it working here, but I am not a linux person and can not speak to if this is
good/bad config. I welcome any sugestions that might help nail down some issues. Can
anyone tell me why I get this in the mail.log file?
spamd[2724]: Still running as root: user not specified, not found, or set
On Wed, Sep 18, 2002 at 12:44:14PM +0100, Ray Gardener wrote:
> I upgraded to 2.40 (now 2.41) last week and the messages which are definitely in the
>DCC database aren't being marked as such by spamassassin when connected to via spamc.
>Interestingly it is detected when running spamassassin -t <
On Tue, Jul 16, 2002 at 03:39:40PM -0700, Kevin Gagel wrote:
> corrupted. What I mean is that there is somehow an extra line feed being
> attached. How do I tell spamc to use spamassassin's -F 0 option?
"-F 0" won't remove a line feed, but the answer to your question is--
you don't. You tell spa
Never mind. I was trying to get spamc to accept the paramater when spamd needed
it instead. All is working well now.
Kevin Gagel wrote:
>
> I've got another problem here. (no surprise eh!)
> Now that I am relaying from my anti-virus scanner to the SpamAssassin scanner to
> my mail server, and it
At 07/02/2002 21:24, Kenneth Porter wrote:
>In /etc/procmailrc I have:
>
>:0fw
>| /usr/bin/spamc -u spamd
>
>Before adding the -u to spamc, no processing appeared to happen, and log
>
>What's the right way to get per-user configs in this setup?
I believe you can fix this by addding
DROPPR
Michael Leone ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> On Sat, 2002-06-29 at 19:24, Dan Allen wrote:
> > I can't figure this one out, but I have to soon or it is going to be
> > my rear in the hole. I switched over from junkfilter to
> > spamassassin and thought all was working, until I send myself a
> > me
On Sat, 2002-06-29 at 19:24, Dan Allen wrote:
> I can't figure this one out, but I have to soon or it is going to be
> my rear in the hole. I switched over from junkfilter to
> spamassassin and thought all was working, until I send myself a
> message from an external yahoo account I had. All loc
Jason Haar wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 10, 2002 at 10:18:51AM -0800, Pete Hanson wrote:
>
>>Looking at the source for spamc, it looks to me like a message that exceeds
>>the maximum message size is simply skipped entirely, which actually requires
>>reading in most of the message first - fair enough, as
On Mon, Jun 10, 2002 at 10:18:51AM -0800, Pete Hanson wrote:
> Looking at the source for spamc, it looks to me like a message that exceeds
> the maximum message size is simply skipped entirely, which actually requires
> reading in most of the message first - fair enough, as it's hard to
> determin
Is your home directory mounted via NFS?
C
Skip Montanaro wrote:
SM> debug: 31245 Trying to get lock on /home/skip/.spamassassin/auto-whitelist
pass 22
___
Don't miss the 2002 Sprint PCS Application Developer's Conference
August
Craig> Ok, so try running
Craig> spamd -c -a -D -L
Craig> from the command line, then see what it says when you pipe
Craig> something through spamc.
A whole series of lines like
debug: 31245 Trying to get lock on /home/skip/.spamassassin/auto-whitelist pass 22
I killed sp
Skip Montanaro wrote:
SM> If I run spamd from a terminal window as root like so:
SM>
SM> spamd -D -L
SM>
SM> I can feed it spam via spamc to my heart's content and it all works as
SM> expected. (In fact, I fed it about 23,000 saved spams earlier. It
SM> identified 19,000 as spam and 4,000 a
>The basis of the problems seems to be that sendmail won't send the full email
>across to spamc for whatever reason, at least on some platforms. Seems like it
>would be logical for the whole message to get sent, then to read the whole
Wouldn't it be rather spamass-milter that is not sending the
Thanks Craig,
I'll try the MIMEDefang and see what happens
Jim
--
On 2002.05.15 14:09 Craig R Hughes wrote:
> Though I've never used sendmail/milter myself, from observing the
> comments
> flying back and forth on this list about using spamass-milter I think
> the answer
> is one of a few
Though I've never used sendmail/milter myself, from observing the comments
flying back and forth on this list about using spamass-milter I think the answer
is one of a few things:
1. Use MIMEDefang as a front end for SpamAssassin instead of spamass-milter.
MIMEDefang apparently works, spamass-mil
Dan Wilson wrote:
DW> I still haven't got this issue resolved and would like some more input on it.
DW>
DW> Everything lookes correct in my /etc/resolv.conf, /etc/hosts,
DW> and /etc/nsswitch.conf.
DW>
DW> However, when I do:
DW> $ host localhost
DW>
DW> I get:
DW> [root@ryloth root]# host localh
On Mon, Apr 15, 2002 at 03:54:26PM -0600, Dan Wilson wrote:
> The one question I have was that I had it configured in my /etc/nsswitch.conf
> to look at the files first:
>
> [dan@ryloth dan]$ grep ^hosts: /etc/nsswitch.conf
> hosts: files nisplus dns
>
> Why didn't it look at my /etc/host
hat happens. nscd by the way is the caching
> > nameserver that RH uses I think. Sounds to me like a hostname resolution
>
> > problem.
> >
> > C
> >
> > Dan Wilson wrote:
> >
> > DW> Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2002 12:16:10 -0600
> > DW> Fr
EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> DW> To: Theo Van Dinter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> DW> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED],
> DW> Marcellus Barrus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> DW> Subject: Re: [SAtalk] spamc not working also
> DW>
> DW> I've actually run an strace on it and dete
It all looks correct:
/etc/hosts:
# Do not remove the following line, or various programs
# that require network functionality will fail.
127.0.0.1 ryloth localhost.localdomain localhost
/etc/nsswitch.conf:
[root@ryloth etc]# grep ^hosts: /etc/nsswitch.conf
hosts: files nisplus dn
On Fri, Apr 12, 2002 at 12:59:39PM -0600, Dan Wilson wrote:
> > perl -e 'use Socket;' \
> > -e 'print scalar gethostbyaddr(inet_aton("127.0.0.1"),AF_INET),"\n";'
>
> I get "ryloth"... which is the name of the machine without the domain name.
> I'm assuming that is what is supposed to happen.
>
On Sat, Apr 13, 2002 at 10:30:40AM -0600, Dan Wilson wrote:
| That looks like the problem:
|
| [root@ryloth Mail-SpamAssassin-2.20]# host localhost
| Host localhost. not found: 3(NXDOMAIN)
| [root@ryloth Mail-SpamAssassin-2.20]#
|
| How do I fix this... is it in /etc/resolv.conf?
/etc/hosts :
ike a hostname resolution
> problem.
>
> C
>
> Dan Wilson wrote:
>
> DW> Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2002 12:16:10 -0600
> DW> From: Dan Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> DW> To: Theo Van Dinter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> DW> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED],
> DW>
> > Shouldn't this be :0fbw? Otherwise it doesn't filter the
> > body, just the header.
>
> I was using what was listed on the spamassassin sitewide
> configuration page. Shouldn't that be updated too?
For a filter the default is header+body, "b" or "h" are used to specify
you should filter o
lem.
C
Dan Wilson wrote:
DW> Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2002 12:16:10 -0600
DW> From: Dan Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
DW> To: Theo Van Dinter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
DW> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED],
DW> Marcellus Barrus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
DW> Subject: Re: [SAtalk] spa
>
CW> To: Elie Rosenblum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
CW> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
CW> Subject: Re: [SAtalk] spamc not working?
CW>
CW>
CW> > Shouldn't this be :0fbw? Otherwise it doesn't filter the body, just the
CW> > header.
CW>
CW> I was using what was li
Quoting Theo Van Dinter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Hmmm...
>
> Looking at the code, right after the connection is accepted, spamd does a
> reverse lookup on the
> connecting IP (127.0.0.1 in this case):
>
> my($port,$iaddr) = sockaddr_in($paddr);
> my $name = gethostbyaddr($iaddr,AF_INET);
On Fri, Apr 12, 2002 at 12:30:10PM -0600, Dan Wilson wrote:
> Nope... It just hangs:
> [root@ryloth Mail-SpamAssassin-2.11]# telnet localhost 783
> Trying 127.0.0.1...
> Connected to localhost.
> Escape character is '^]'.
>
> I guess that means it's a problem in spamd then... I've got the debug o
Quoting Theo Van Dinter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Fri, Apr 12, 2002 at 12:16:10PM -0600, Dan Wilson wrote:
> > /var/run/.nscd_socket is not found. I'm not sure what creates that though.
>
> > Any suggestions would help. Another user mentioned that I should have
> > a /var/run/spamass.sock= f
On Fri, Apr 12, 2002 at 12:16:10PM -0600, Dan Wilson wrote:
> /var/run/.nscd_socket is not found. I'm not sure what creates that though.
> Any suggestions would help. Another user mentioned that I should have
> a /var/run/spamass.sock= file, that I could just symlink, but that doesn't
> exis
I've actually run an strace on it and determined that I am missing a socket
file.
/var/run/.nscd_socket is not found. I'm not sure what creates that though.
Any suggestions would help. Another user mentioned that I should have
a /var/run/spamass.sock= file, that I could just symlink, but th
On Fri, Apr 12, 2002 at 09:02:18AM -0600, Dan Wilson wrote:
> SpamAssassin 2.11
> RH 7.2 Linux 2.4.7-10
> glibc 2.2.4 (someone mentioned this might be the problem)
> Qmail (although I haven't gotten to the qmail-scanner integration yet)
> I have downloaded the other packages (razor, qmail-scanner,
> Shouldn't this be :0fbw? Otherwise it doesn't filter the body, just the
> header.
I was using what was listed on the spamassassin sitewide configuration
page. Shouldn't that be updated too?
-Chuck
--
Chuck Wolber
System Administrator
AltaServ Corporation
(425)576-1202
ten.vresatla@wkcuhc
On Thu, Apr 11, 2002 at 05:46:01PM -0400, Jeff wrote:
> This was working before I updated RH 7.2 with the new errata for glibc
> Here is a test with both using the sample on the command linenote the
> lack of SPAM in the output of the first one.just returns without
> tagging.
>
> [root@th
> Pipe a message to spamc. Eg :
>
> cat message.rfc822 | spamc
>
> Verify that you get the message back. The easiest way to see if the
> message was tagged as spam or not is
>
> cat message.rfc822 | spamc | grep -i spam
Ok, I did it and it still did not get tagged. It just passed th
t; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, April 11, 2002 3:09 PM
Subject: Re: [SAtalk] spamc not working?
> On Thu, Apr 11, 2002 at 01:16:13PM -0700, Chuck Wolber wrote:
>
> | > You can also verify that spamc works from the command line.
> |
> | I
> Here we even have a little action from the spamd on localhost but no
> usual entry in the syslog for clean message or identified spam. I used
> to get this when you updated perl with CPAN instead of the RH rpms but
> this was working with 5.6.1. Please take note that this behavior has
> happen
> Is the message by any chance larger than 250k? If so then spamc will
> pass it through unchanged. You can control the threshold with spamc's
> '-s' flag.
No, these are just small test messages.
--
Chuck Wolber
System Administrator
AltaServ Corporation
(425)576-1202
ten.vresatla@wkcuhc
OTECTED]>
Cc: "Theo Van Dinter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Elie Rosenblum"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, April 11, 2002 4:52 PM
Subject: Re: [SAtalk] spamc not working?
> Chuck Wolber wrote:
>
> CW> > For this problem, define &
On Thu, Apr 11, 2002 at 01:16:13PM -0700, Chuck Wolber wrote:
| > You can also verify that spamc works from the command line.
|
| I also tried that too. I was able to connect, which seemed to be ok. I
| also replaced spamc with a cheesy shell script that would output a line
| into a file ever
Chuck Wolber wrote:
CW> > For this problem, define "not working"... Do incoming mails have the
CW> > X-Spam-Status header included? Is the # of hits set to 0.0?
CW>
CW> No, no X-Spam-Status header or anything. Looking at the headers and body
CW> of the incoming messages, there is no indicatio
Theo Van Dinter wrote:
TVD> For this problem, define "not working"... Do incoming mails have the
TVD> X-Spam-Status header included? Is the # of hits set to 0.0?
TVD>
TVD> If the header is there, I would look at permission issues with spamd.
TVD>
TVD> If the header isn't there, I would assume
On Thu, Apr 11, 2002 at 03:58:31PM -0400, Theo Van Dinter wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 11, 2002 at 03:36:33PM -0400, Elie Rosenblum wrote:
> > Shouldn't this be :0fbw? Otherwise it doesn't filter the body,
> > just the header.
> >
> > (I generally specify :0fhbw, just so it's clear what I intend)
>
> pr
> I use /usr/bin/spamc in my RH system. The procmailrc man page seems to
> say that the explicit /usr/bin is not necessary, as it is in the default
> PATH, but that's the obvious difference.
I tried that, but thanks for the suggestion.
> You can also verify that spamc works from the command l
> For this problem, define "not working"... Do incoming mails have the
> X-Spam-Status header included? Is the # of hits set to 0.0?
No, no X-Spam-Status header or anything. Looking at the headers and body
of the incoming messages, there is no indication that spamassassin did
anything to th
On Thu, Apr 11, 2002 at 03:36:33PM -0400, Elie Rosenblum wrote:
> Shouldn't this be :0fbw? Otherwise it doesn't filter the body,
> just the header.
>
> (I generally specify :0fhbw, just so it's clear what I intend)
procmail defaults to hb. :0fW is all you need. (w or W actually,
depending on wh
On Thu, 2002-04-11 at 12:09, Chuck Wolber wrote:
> :0fw
> | spamc
>
> It turns out that no mail gets reported that way. When I alter the
> procmail rule to the following:
>
> :0fw
> | /usr/bin/spamassassin -P
>
> Mail is reported just fine.
I use /usr/bin/spamc in my RH system. The procmailrc
On Thu, Apr 11, 2002 at 12:09:01PM -0700, Chuck Wolber wrote:
> System:
> RH7.1 all RH updates applied.
> Sendmail 8.11.6 (stock, no tweaks except a different RBL)
> Razor 1.19
> Spamassassin Latest Stable
> procmail-3.21-0.71
>
>
> I start spamd as normal (with the RH startup script) and then r
I just noticed this as well. I think that, since I have several boxes using
spamc that no longer return any spam identification after the new 2.2.4-24
glibc was added that this C library change may be the culprit? Anyone else
experience this?
- Original Message -
From: "Chuck Wolber" <[EM
> Yeah, you're wrong. spamc will automagically pass the username it's
> executing as to spamd. So spamc -u $LOGNAME is identical to spamc.
> spamc -u somethingelse is however not the same as spamc by itself. So
> the distinction is based on what userID spamc is running as. I myself
Well, I d
Yeah, you're wrong. spamc will automagically pass the username it's
executing as to spamd. So spamc -u $LOGNAME is identical to spamc.
spamc -u somethingelse is however not the same as spamc by itself. So
the distinction is based on what userID spamc is running as. I myself
use spamc -u becau
> (Get rid of -u $LOGNAME -- it's deprecated anyways)
Depending on your settings, the -u option may be the ONLY way for
spamc/spamd to create the user_pref files.
And the setting I am thinking about is when the user's dir are NFS
mounted on the mail server, from another machine, and that they ar
On Sat, Mar 30, 2002 at 09:13:58AM -0500, Jeffrey Bacon wrote:
> So you've got it running on a LInix box? I'm having a devil of a time
> gettig mail to be delivered after running ti through spamc on my Red Hat
> box. Could you just check to see if my setup is the same as yours?
>
> /etc/procm
1 - 100 of 127 matches
Mail list logo
