Great, just wanted to be sure.
Thanks!
Mark
> -Original Message-
> From: Matt Kettler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Friday, January 23, 2004 9:38 AM
> To: Mark Squire; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [SAtalk] Auto-learn SA after having trained it
>
>
> At
Hello Mark,
Friday, January 23, 2004, 7:19:45 AM, you wrote:
MS> Hi all,
MS> I have been training SA manually for a couple of weeks now. I estimate
MS> a good 2000 emails for both Spam and Ham have been learned by it.
MS> Coupla questions though . . . I want to put it into auto-learn mode
MS> be
At 10:19 AM 1/23/2004, Mark Squire wrote:
Hi all,
I have been training SA manually for a couple of weeks now. I estimate
a good 2000 emails for both Spam and Ham have been learned by it.
Coupla questions though . . . I want to put it into auto-learn mode
because I have only trained it on a few of
At Thu Jan 1 02:09:41 2004, Theo Van Dinter wrote:
> Well, Bayes says it's 100% spam, which doesn't count towards autolearn
> decisions.As the debug output says, the original score (scoreset
> 3, with no learn or userconf rules applied), the message scores 0.1
> (HTML_MESSAGE). In scoreset 1
On Wed, Dec 31, 2003 at 03:39:12PM +0100, Csaba Kiss wrote:
> debug: auto-learn: currently using scoreset 3. recomputing score based
> on scoreset 1.
> debug: Score set 1 chosen.
> debug: auto-learn: original score: 0.1, recomputed score: 0.001
> debug: Score set 3 chosen.
> debug: auto-learn? ye
disregard the last mail.
trashed the bayes tokens etc and rebuilt SA.
Working now.
Thanks all
> -Original Message-
> From: Thomas Kinghorn
> Sent: 17 November 2003 08:34
> To: Spamassassin-Talk (E-mail)
> Subject: RE: [SAtalk] auto learn is ALWAYS no
>
>
> Hi
in-Talk (E-mail)
> Subject: Re: [SAtalk] auto learn is ALWAYS no
>
>
> At 07:32 AM 11/14/03 +0200, Thomas Kinghorn wrote:
> >I am a little confused as to what triggers the autolearn function.
>
>
> For autolearning purposes, a second score for the email is
> calculated.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hello Johnno,
Saturday, November 15, 2003, 6:41:07 PM, you wrote:
J> I have just noticed in my email headers this
J> X-Spam-Status: Yes, hits=24.8 required=7.5 tests=autolearn=no
version=2.60
J> I want to use autolearn
J> I used auto_learn 1 is th
At 07:32 AM 11/14/03 +0200, Thomas Kinghorn wrote:
I am a little confused as to what triggers the autolearn function.
For autolearning purposes, a second score for the email is calculated. This
score is calculated as if bayes were disabled. ie: bayes rules don't count,
and the appropriate non-b
On Fri, Nov 14, 2003 at 07:32:59AM +0200, Thomas Kinghorn wrote:
> I am a little confused as to what triggers the autolearn function.
Read the docs, it's in there. If you're not getting autolearning,
you may need to adjust your autolearn settings. But read the docs,
it'll help you out.
--
Rand
On Tue, Oct 28, 2003 at 12:13:03PM -0600, Bill Polhemus wrote:
> How can I know for sure if Auto-Learn is functioning correctly?
Run with -D. it'll tell you if it's doing autolearning.
--
Randomly Generated Tagline:
Son, this is the only time I'm ever gonna say this. It is not okay to
lose.
At Wed Oct 29 14:15:51 2003, Bill Polhemus wrote:
>
> Are there other criteria, though?
>
> For example, I have set the threshold at which Auto-Learn is
> "triggered" for Spam at 7.99. Anything scoring over that is
> designated to be "auto-learned."
>
> Yet one came through this morning at 12.9,
am.
William L. Polhemus, Jr. P.E.
Polhemus Engineering Company
Katy, Texas USA
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Martin
Radford
Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2003 2:23 PM
To: Bill Polhemus
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [SAtalk] Auto-Learn
At Tue
On October 28, 2003 09:50 pm, Bill Polhemus wrote:
> However, is there not some way to adjust the thresholds at which Auto-Learn
> works? I haven't seen a single Spam yet that was "autolearned," even if it
> has an SA score of 15 or more.
This may be what you are looking for (from "man Mail::SpamA
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Martin
Radford
Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2003 2:23 PM
To: Bill Polhemus
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [SAtalk] Auto-Learn
"autolearn=no" indicates that this particular message was not learned
fr
At Tue Oct 28 18:13:03 2003, Bill Polhemus wrote:
> How can I know for sure if Auto-Learn is functioning correctly?
>
> It does seem to be working for SOME messages but the headers in many of =
> them say:
>
> X-Spam-Status: . autolearn=no
Auto-learning is by definition automated, and as such t
Then it's probably functioning correctly. "autolearn=no" means *that*
message wasn't autolearned.
Bill Polhemus wrote:
How can I know for sure if Auto-Learn is functioning correctly?
It does seem to be working for SOME messages but the headers in many
of them say:
X-Spam-Status: … autolearn=n
And what about when the user name and home is in the database only and the mails are
delivered under some other "universal" user??
HOw SA knows, where is the real user's home directory?
On Fri, 26 Sep 2003, Matt Kettler wrote:
> At 03:33 AM 9/26/03 -0700, JP Kelly wrote:
>
> >Why is SA looking i
At 03:33 AM 9/26/03 -0700, JP Kelly wrote:
Why is SA looking in /dev/null/ ???
SA looks in the home directory for the user it runs as. In the case of
spamd, if no user is ever specified, and it is started as root, it will
fall back to the user "nobody" for security.
Try passing the -u parameter
On Fri, Sep 26, 2003 at 03:33:02AM -0700 JP Kelly wrote :
> Can someone tell me why auto-learn is failing here.
> >From the log:
Looks like your home dir is set to /dev/null - odd!
--
Ian
---
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Welco
"Eyvonne Sharp" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I haven't been able to find any information in the docs on what messages
> are auto_learned and why. Users that have received over thousands of
> emails and have had hundreds of messages classified as spam will only
> have a bayes_msgcount of 94. Doe
Simon Byrnand wrote:
> At 16:38 14/06/03 +0100, Mathew Hendry wrote:
>
>> No, auto-learn learns only from mails with particularly high or low
>> scores. The default thresholds are
>>
>> auto_learn_threshold_nonspam-0.5
>> auto_learn_threshold_spam 10
>
> In fact the default settings ar
At 16:38 14/06/03 +0100, Mathew Hendry wrote:
Jim Ford wrote:
> If auto-learn is on (default setting), is there any point in putting
> correctly identified spam and ham through sa-learn? Is the only use
> for sa-learn to teach SA when spam or ham is incorrectly identified?
No, auto-learn learns on
On Sat, Jun 14, 2003 at 04:38:58PM +0100, Mathew Hendry wrote:
> Jim Ford wrote:
>
> > If auto-learn is on (default setting), is there any point in putting
> > correctly identified spam and ham through sa-learn? Is the only use
> > for sa-learn to teach SA when spam or ham is incorrectly identifie
Jim Ford wrote:
> If auto-learn is on (default setting), is there any point in putting
> correctly identified spam and ham through sa-learn? Is the only use
> for sa-learn to teach SA when spam or ham is incorrectly identified?
No, auto-learn learns only from mails with particularly high or low
s
25 matches
Mail list logo
