Re: [SAtalk] 2nd of 2 problems... using spamc vs. spamassassin direct...

2002-05-16 Thread dman
On Thu, May 16, 2002 at 10:12:53AM -0700, Chuck Wolber wrote: | This results in no discernable scanning: | | - | :0fw | | /usr/bin/spamc | - What happens if you run echo "test" | spamc at a shell prompt? You did start spamd before running spamc, right? -D -- A)bort, R)

Re: [SAtalk] 2nd of 2 problems... using spamc vs. spamassassin direct...

2002-05-16 Thread Ward Vandewege
This works just fine for me: # Run the mail through SpamAssassin :0fw | spamc # And check the results... :0 * ^X-Spam-Flag: YES personal/dialupmaybespam/ spamc is in my path, I'm running SA 2.20. My spamc lives in /usr/local/bin/spamc. Sure you don't have path problems? Bye for no

Re: [SAtalk] 2nd of 2 problems... using spamc vs. spamassassin direct...

2002-05-15 Thread Theo Van Dinter
On Wed, May 15, 2002 at 09:38:48AM -0500, Skip Montanaro wrote: > What logs? I had the same problem and just switched back to running > spamassassin directly. syslog. If spamd is running, it should be logging to syslog. If running spamc doesn't add any headers to the message, spamc either 1) c

Re: [SAtalk] 2nd of 2 problems... using spamc vs. spamassassin direct...

2002-05-15 Thread Skip Montanaro
>> The process just doesn't run (no scoring, etc.) Theo> Are you running spamd? What do the logs say? What logs? I had the same problem and just switched back to running spamassassin directly. ___ Have big pipes? SourceForg

Re: [SAtalk] 2nd of 2 problems... using spamc vs. spamassassin direct...

2002-05-14 Thread Theo Van Dinter
On Tue, May 14, 2002 at 07:33:05PM -0600, Ron Carter wrote: > The process just doesn't run (no scoring, etc.) Are you running spamd? What do the logs say? -- Randomly Generated Tagline: Marketting Professional's Motto: "We're not screwing the customers, all we're doing is holding them down wh