At 07:13 PM 8/14/2003 -0700, Ricardo Kleemann wrote:
Thanks Dan,
I have taught it with --spam with a significant number of
messages, although I haven't taught it with --ham yet.
Is that a problem?
If the bayes database doesn't have 200 ham messages in it's learning
database, the use of the bayes
Hi,
In this case, the user nobody does have a valid home, and it
also has the .spamassassin directory with the bayes files in
it.
So again, I'm confused as to why bayes rules are not being
accounted for in the SA report headers.
- Original Message Follows -
> At 07:15 PM 8/14/2003 -0700
At 07:15 PM 8/14/2003 -0700, Ricardo Kleemann wrote:
Hi,
Is there a problem running spamc as "nobody"?
I'm actually using "nobody" as the user running it, and I
have run sa-learn as "nobody" as well. I figured it doesn't
matter which user it is, as long as that particular user has
the bayes datab
Thanks Dan,
I have taught it with --spam with a significant number of
messages, although I haven't taught it with --ham yet.
Is that a problem?
Ricardo
- Original Message Follows -
> Hi,
>
> I'm pretty sure that Bayes analysis doesn't kick in until
> the program has had a chance to le
Hi,
Is there a problem running spamc as "nobody"?
I'm actually using "nobody" as the user running it, and I
have run sa-learn as "nobody" as well. I figured it doesn't
matter which user it is, as long as that particular user has
the bayes database and tokens setup.
Ricardo
- Original Messa
At Thu Aug 14 17:40:19 2003, Ricardo Kleemann wrote:
>
> The output from spamc didn't even show a score for bayes.
> Shouldn't it at least show a percentile score for bayes?
> Here's what it reported:
>
> X-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.7 required=5.0
>
> tests=MAILTO_TO_SPAM_ADDR,MSGID_HAS_NO_
At 01:23 PM 8/14/2003 -0700, Ricardo Kleemann wrote:
This is a message that has been run through sa-learn with
--spam, and yet I get nothing reported back from spamc. I
did restart spamd after altering local.cf. I'm running spamc
as the same user that ran sa-learn.
I'd try running spamd with debugg
Hi,
Thanks for the suggestion.
I added the settings to local.cf as suggested, then ran the
message through spamc again, however it reports the exact
same thing as before. :-(
This is a message that has been run through sa-learn with
--spam, and yet I get nothing reported back from spamc. I
did r
