I have a similar situation, and I have removed all my rule sets. Here is
the output from top
top - 00:35:45 up 1 day, 14:45, 2 users, load average: 2.45, 2.40, 2.48
Tasks: 158 total, 3 running, 154 sleeping, 0 stopped, 1 zombie
Cpu(s): 1.0% us, 1.6% sy, 97.4% ni, 0.0% id, 0.0% wa, 0.
On Sat, 2004-10-02 at 17:01 -0400, Asif Iqbal wrote:
> I just upgraded my SA from 2.63 to 3.0. I did the sa-learn --sync after
> the upgrade and the restarted spamd. Now I am seeing this error in the
> log
>
> @4000415f15ec35d6286c Cannot open bayes databases
> /etc/mail/spamassassin/bayes_*
Asif Iqbal wrote:
> I just upgraded my SA from 2.63 to 3.0. I did the sa-learn --sync after
> the upgrade and the restarted spamd. Now I am seeing this error in the
> log
>
> @4000415f15ec35d6286c Cannot open bayes databases
> /etc/mail/spamassassin/bayes_* R/O: tie failed: Permission denied
1-23 wrote:
> The running of the things seems OK as the messages are sent to the filter
> server and checked and resent to the normal servers. Header lines are adede
> (qmail-scanner etc..)
>
> But I don't succeed in getting any spam. No mail is marked. Probably I
> missed something in configurati
Hi All
I just upgraded my SA from 2.63 to 3.0. I did the sa-learn --sync after
the upgrade and the restarted spamd. Now I am seeing this error in the
log
@4000415f15ec35d6286c Cannot open bayes databases
/etc/mail/spamassassin/bayes_* R/O: tie failed: Permission denied
@4000415f15f025579
Hello All,
greetings, as I an new to spamassassin.
I am in Belgium.
I first installed 2.64 as a trial to come in your world.
This is my config.
some servers with domains
1 server that runs the spamassassin and antivir filters.
The running of the things seems OK as the messages are sent to the fi
Yesterday I commented that I was seeing spamd children eating a lot of
memory, pushing the machine into swap. I've been keeping an eye on
the spamd children this morning.
Overnight, all five children were using around 4 meg. This morning
sometime, one spamd child shot up to 250M:
Mem: 513948K
Title: [OT] The list is quiet...
Almost too quiet!
Echo...
Echo..
Echo.
I guess no ones home today.
On Tue, 28 Sep 2004, Tom Yates wrote:
i've just upgraded to SA 3.0.0 (thanks, theo) on a RH9 box, and
effectiveness has dropped from <1% false negatives to about 5% false
negatives. looking at the output, it suggests that DNS-related tests
(specifically SPF, but i also suspect the various black
Hi!
I recently installed SpamAssassin 3.0.0.
What I'm trying to do, is having it scan a mixed
mailbox, split the mail into two seperate mailboxes (spam.mbox and ham.mbox) and
then analyze how successful it was.
I do this with:
formail -s procmail -m sa.check <
mixed.mbox
where sa.check c
On Friday 01 October 2004 04:10 pm, Carnegie, Martin wrote:
> >So they're saying they can't be RFC compliant? The only thing I see
>
> that
>
> >might need to be fixed is: FAKE_HELO_SHAW_CA
> >
> >Other then that, it seems _they_ have some work to do.
> >
> >--Chris
>
> Well they said that hopeful
On Sat, Oct 02, 2004 at 02:51:53AM +0200, Marco van den Bovenkamp wrote:
> Marco van den Bovenkamp wrote:
>
> >No. No user_prefs at all, and no SQL. Just a global 'local.cf'.
>
> Forgot my default (effectively empty) user_prefs. Nate Schindler came up
> with what's probably happening: spamd read
Marco van den Bovenkamp wrote:
No. No user_prefs at all, and no SQL. Just a global 'local.cf'.
Forgot my default (effectively empty) user_prefs. Nate Schindler came up
with what's probably happening: spamd reads the whitelist entries from
the last place it checks, overwriting what it reads earlie
It is not fully tested yet but here it is. NB that I changed the USER
env variable to USERNAME. I do not know if this is common on all
flavors of linux but USER does not transliterate under su conditions to
the child id but stays the parent. The var USERNAME does change to
reflect the child use
I found 3.0 pushing my machine into swapping as well this afternoon -- a
first for me. I stopped and restarted my smtp server and spamd, and it's
back to normal for now.
I'm beginning to think I might be better off running spamassassin in
unique processes instead of as a daemon. The load time wa
NAHHH!!! He just a reporter, though one of the more important ones!!! Now
if you had broken the leg of one of the top ten drivers Rhode Island would
be way too small to hide in..
FYI: Not all NASCAR fans are from the SOUTH!!!
Regards,
Pete
Peter P. Benac, CCNA
Emacolet Networking Services
Michael Parker wrote:
And the very first time after spamd startup. Feeding a message with a
whitelisted From: gave me this the first time (using 'spamc -y':
[snip]
Are you by chance using SQL for your user_prefs?
No. No user_prefs at all, and no SQL. Just a global 'local.cf'.
--
Gro
On Sat, Oct 02, 2004 at 01:45:04AM +0200, Marco van den Bovenkamp wrote:
> Marco van den Bovenkamp wrote:
>
> >I can add to this that it does work when you use spamassassin itself.
>
> And the very first time after spamd startup. Feeding a message with a
> whitelisted From: gave me this the first
Hello Loren,
Thursday, September 30, 2004, 6:23:46 PM, you wrote:
>> To the extent that user_prefs files and (most) command-line options
>> are similarly backwards- and forwards-compatible, this upgrade will
>> be painless for us. To be more explicit, I would like to make
>> necessary changes *b
19 matches
Mail list logo
