Re: [SAtalk] Not Spam-scanned attachment-mails

2003-08-20 Thread Jens Strohschnitter
> > Hope someone can help me to fix the prob :-) > > If you run the two message through spamassassin manually, does it detect > them both? If so, it's an Exim problem. > Hi, hm, how can I test a mail with attachment ? The pure text I scanned with spamassassin -t < spam.txt | less but how can I

Re: [SAtalk] Not Spam-scanned attachment-mails

2003-08-20 Thread Jens Strohschnitter
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > I can't see any diffrence but the mail is not marked as ***SPAM*** > > > > Hope someone can help me to fix the prob :-) > > I suspect that your attachment is making the email larger than the maximum > size message SA will scan. Try setting the maximum size larger.

RE: [SAtalk] Not Spam-scanned attachment-mails

2003-08-20 Thread Mark Wendt
Bill, I've just started using spamassassin on my mail server. What seems to be the consensus as to a good nominal size to set the maximum size to be? I realize a lot of this depends on the system it's running on, but maybe a ball park figure? Thanks, Mark At 08:02 AM 8/20/2003 -0400,

RE: [SAtalk] Not Spam-scanned attachment-mails

2003-08-20 Thread Bill
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > I can't see any diffrence but the mail is not marked as ***SPAM*** > > Hope someone can help me to fix the prob :-) I suspect that your attachment is making the email larger than the maximum size message SA will scan. Try setting the maximum size larger. If I understand c

Re: [SAtalk] Not Spam-scanned attachment-mails

2003-08-20 Thread Theo Van Dinter
On Wed, Aug 20, 2003 at 11:25:59AM +0200, Jens Strohschnitter wrote: > Hope someone can help me to fix the prob :-) If you run the two message through spamassassin manually, does it detect them both? If so, it's an Exim problem. -- Randomly Generated Tagline: "Shell programming can be a difficu