> "BS" == Bart Schaefer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
BS> On Mon, 24 Jun 2002, Duncan Findlay wrote:
>> The problem is it doesn't work at all
BS> It worked, but only for messages that actually did mention ebay in the
BS> headers somewhere. For completely unrelated messages it was broken.
Wh
Vivek Khera wrote:
>>"BS" == Bart Schaefer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>
> BS> On Mon, 24 Jun 2002, Duncan Findlay wrote:
>
>>>The problem is it doesn't work at all
>>
>
> BS> It worked, but only for messages that actually did mention ebay in the
> BS> headers somewhere. For complet
Am Dienstag, 25. Juni 2002 08:55 schrieben Sie - you wrote:
> Dr. Martinus wrote:
> > I tried running
> >
> > "spamassassin -t -L sample-spam.txt"
> >
> > from within the directory where sample-spam.txt resides. Nothing
> > happens, i.e. it appears as if something is going on, but it
> > takes too
I have finally managed to get a reproducible case of a problem that has
been annoying me for a while.
Using SpamAssassin 2.31 on perl 5.005_03 on a Sun Ultra 5 running Solaris 8.
Run the command
./spamassassin -t < sample-nonspam.txt
and I get this at the end of the output
SPAM: -
Julian Field writes:
> Run the command
> ./spamassassin -t < sample-nonspam.txt
> and I get this at the end of the output
>
> SPAM: Start SpamAssassin results --
> SPAM: This mail is probably spam. The original message has been altered
> SPAM: s
howdy
I'm using the latest spamassassin with mailscanner, and am trying to figure out
where a bug lies.
mailscanner occasionally gives a blank spamassassin report, which should
never happen. mailscanner uses the perl API to SA.
Are there any known bugs with the SA API re: blank reports?
--
J
On Tue, Jun 25, 2002 at 02:02:07PM +0100, Julian Field wrote:
> Run the command
> ./spamassassin -t < sample-nonspam.txt
> and I get this at the end of the output
> SPAM: Content analysis details: (-2.7 hits, 9 required)
>
> So -2.7 > 9 is it?
$ man spamassassin
...
-t, --test-m
I think what Julian is saying and I recall see the same thing with
Mailscanner before he's temp fix is that if you called is_spam() using
the same message, that it will give the same scoring but is_spam() would
return true.
-Original Message-
From: Geoff Gibbs [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
When I run the test of spamassassin no output is produced output file is empty), yet
setting the debug flag does show that work is being done. I originally ran the test
without installing dccproc but the results I got were the same. It seemed to complain
about dccproc being missing. When I r
<>
Hello Users,
Pardon me for joining the list with a question ;-)
I do run Exim-3.36 on FreeBSD and would like to run SA globally.
I have downloaded the latest version and put in in /usr/local/etc/Spamassassin.
The only decisions that I find difficult to make (because this is an ISP) are
as follo
Am Dienstag, 25. Juni 2002 14:25 schrieb Dr. Martinus - wrote:
> Am Dienstag, 25. Juni 2002 08:55 schrieben Sie - you wrote:
> > Dr. Martinus wrote:
> > > I tried running
> > >
> > > "spamassassin -t -L sample-spam.txt"
> > >
> > > from within the directory where sample-spam.txt resides.
> > > Not
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Said Odhiambo Washington on Tue, Jun 25, 2002 at 05:43:11PM +0300:
> 1. How do I model my /etc/mail/spamassassin/local.cf? I do not want
> to mess up the subject line so much though I have to. I am going to
> setup a list (opt-in) for users who want
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I am trying to upgrade to 2.30 out of FreeBSD ports and I get this when
I start up spamd (which starts successfully, BTW):
Jun 25 11:38:37 mail spamd[33840]: Failed to compile body SpamAssassin
tests, skipping: (syntax error at (eval 24) line 27,
I am having the same problem as you. I have not had any success in soliciting
help either. I thought that my setup was to blame but I'm fairly confident that
it is some how SA that has the problem. I also think that it's the -P that is
responsible...
Since the -P means to pipe the email through,
Yes, I've tried the Cloudmark plugin for Outlook.
It's very beta right now. It seems to have two functions 1) take new
messages delivered to the Inbox and scan them as they come in and 2) scan a
whole folder on demand. The first works ok. Unfortunately, when I start work
in the morning I get alm
On Tue, Jun 25, 2002 at 08:52:51AM -0700, Kevin Gagel wrote:
> Since the -P means to pipe the email through, and the examples show only a SDOUT
> example with just the < redirector, and the examples show only another file
> example with both < and > redirector used with the -P I am assuming that t
On my system using the "spamassassin -P -D < text2bread" only displays the
results to stout. It does not alter anything unless I use the redirect to
another file. I understand that -P is a pipe... but to me a pipe means pipe what
your doing to this, it's the "this" that mystifies me! Are you telli
On Tue, Jun 25, 2002 at 09:10:41AM -0700, Kevin Gagel wrote:
> On my system using the "spamassassin -P -D < text2bread" only displays the
> results to stout. It does not alter anything unless I use the redirect to
> another file. I understand that -P is a pipe... but to me a pipe means pipe what
Are you expecting it to rewrite the file that you're pipeing?
-Original Message-
From: Kevin Gagel [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2002 12:11 PM
To: Theo Van Dinter
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [SAtalk] SA doesn't do anything...
On my syste
I'm quite confused now. I have read an article in a German magazine
which describes roughly the use of spamassassin with KMail. This
article made me to try it out. I have followed the description
exactly as given, compared also with the README and Istall
instructions, everything is correct. No
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Said Larry Rosenman on Tue, Jun 25, 2002 at 10:56:04AM -0500:
> Mine's working just fine with the system perl on a 4.6-STABLE box (2
> of them actually).
I have it working on two other 4.6-RELEASE boxes.
> Did you TOTALLY remove the earlier vers
On Tue, 2002-06-25 at 10:50, Justin R. Miller wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> I am trying to upgrade to 2.30 out of FreeBSD ports and I get this when
> I start up spamd (which starts successfully, BTW):
>
>
>
> Jun 25 11:38:37 mail spamd[33840]: Failed to compile b
Yes, I thought that was the idea. However I realize now that is not what is
happening (or that is not what is supposed to happen). According to the docs I
must use the -P switch. Why? Because I'm not a unix system and my mailboxes
don't conform so I can not let SA deliver the message to the mailbo
On Tue, Jun 25, 2002 at 06:54:13PM +0200, Dr. Martinus wrote:
> instructions, everything is correct. Now you are talking about using
> "<" and ">" and "foo" or something like that, well, I don't know how
> to use these when I use KMail, I don't know what foo means etc. In
foo is given as an ex
I also upgraded and actually found the problem got worse. About half of all
emails are not getting processed now. Could there be a timeout or something
that is causing spamassassin to exit early? Something introduced in 2.3?
That is my hunch for what is happening as I'm running it on a rather s
On Tue, Jun 25, 2002 at 10:26:55AM -0700, Jeff Campbell wrote:
> On Thursday, June 20, 2002, at 11:46 AM, Jeff Campbell wrote:
>
> > On Thursday, June 20, 2002, at 11:32 AM, Carsten Erickson wrote:
> >
> >> I installed 2.3 yesterday, and it seems to be working ok, however I
> >> notice a
> >> fe
Wash --
...and then Odhiambo Washington said...
%
% Hello Users,
Hello!
%
...
% 1. How do I model my /etc/mail/spamassassin/local.cf?
%I do not want to mess up the subject line so much though I have to. I am
In addition to the instruction you've already seen to read the man page,
note t
Hi,
I experience problems with certain kinds of spam that are
apparently not standard compliant (what a surprise ;-)
SA does not add the required LF at the end of the message, and as a
result, my MTA (slocal) does not see the end of the message,
resulting in messages being lumped together.
T
> "AB" == Andreas Busch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
AB> SA does not add the required LF at the end of the message, and as a
AB> result, my MTA (slocal) does not see the end of the message,
AB> resulting in messages being lumped together.
AB> This has caused me to stop using SA 2.31. You ca
SpamAssassin Talk list
Thank you all,
I have now found what my problem is. Unfortunately I can't fix it without my
software being customized. So now I wait on them for that, then I should have it
working. Hopefully by the end of the week.
The explanation:
Windows 2000 server
Running perl
DMail
for_site[2].htm
Description: Binary data
Thank you for contacting the Webmaster at HGTV.ca. We appreciate that you
have taken the time to write us, unfortunately, due to the number of emails
we receive, we cannot respond to every email personally. All emails are
read, and we assure you that your email will be passed on to the appropriate
Title: ScanMail Message: To Recipient virus found or matched file blocking setting.
ScanMail for Microsoft Exchange has taken action on the message, please refer to the contents of this message for further details.
Sender = [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Recipient(s) = [EMAIL PROTECTED];
Subject = [SAtalk
I will be out of the office starting 06/25/2002 and will not return until
06/28/2002.
I will respond to your message when I return. I expect to be back this
Friday. If you need anything that is of an urgent nature, please contact
Leslie Branch x 2826 or Carl Carpenter at x 2343.
---
Jm's autoreply told me to mail it here :)
Paul
-- Forwarded message --
Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2002 23:14:05 +0200 (MET DST)
From: Paul Wouters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: SpamAssassin idea?
Hi,
I noticed that lately, spammers are using a trick to "hide" the p
On Wed, 26 Jun 2002, Olivier Nicole wrote:
> SA could do a reverse DNS check and mark this as very suspicious, but
> on another hand, if expansionpack.xtdnet.nl is an internal mail
> gateway only, why did it accept incoming message from 216.139.180.4,
expansionpack.xtdnet.nl is another ip number
Hi,
are the scores listed on the tests-page up to date?
The SUBJ_ALL_CAPS is scored -0.054.
This means that all caps subjects are a sign of trustworthiness !?
Cheers,
Florian
--
Do files get embarrassed when they get unzipped?
---
This sf.n
38 matches
Mail list logo
