On Sat, Feb 19, 2005 at 11:31:28PM +0100, Kai Schaetzl wrote:
> Trying to install sa 3.0.2 I find that make test for 3.0.1 or 3.0.2 fails
> on Suse 9.0 systems which got the recent security updates (Feb. 10 or so)
> for Perl and Perl-DBI. The test isn't able to start spamd or connect to it
> and
Trying to install sa 3.0.2 I find that make test for 3.0.1 or 3.0.2 fails
on Suse 9.0 systems which got the recent security updates (Feb. 10 or so)
for Perl and Perl-DBI. The test isn't able to start spamd or connect to it
and can't find module Storable although it is installed and up-to-date
(
Am Samstag, 19. Februar 2005 17:13 schrieb Matt Florido:
> Matt Florido wrote:
> > John Fleming wrote:
> >> On Friday 18 February 2005 12:53 pm, Tracey Gates wrote:
> >>> I downloaded the .cf files from the rulesemporium.com site but I don't
> >>> know what to do with them. Do I just place them in
Matt Florido wrote:
John Fleming wrote:
On Friday 18 February 2005 12:53 pm, Tracey Gates wrote:
I downloaded the .cf files from the rulesemporium.com site but I don't
know what to do with them. Do I just place them in the same folder as
my local.cf and SpamAssassin will automatically use them or
Jeff Chan wrote:
On Friday, February 18, 2005, 8:35:35 PM, Jay Levitt wrote:
I have SA 3.01 running under mimedefang 2.43 with sendmail 8.13.1. At
some point, SA seems to stop doing lookups on the DNSBLs; spam gets
through that is listed in multiple BLs; if I check manually with
Hi,
Nope. I'm trying all this on the local box, logged in as root! Thanks
though.
-Original Message-
From: jdow [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 19 February 2005 10:11
To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: Re: Making spamd listen on another IP
Firewall in the way?
{^_^}
- O
Firewall in the way?
{^_^}
- Original Message -
From: "Paul J. Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Hello,
I'm trying to setup spamassassin (for the first time) and using spamd
over a network. The problem I'm getting is that no matter what I do I
can only get spamd to listed on 127.0.0.1.
I'm te
Dear friends,
I have just noticed Socket.pm errors generated by SA for some messages. The
majority of spam emails are processed without any errors but for some messages
here is the error and message is actually not processed - tagged as 0/0:
Feb 19 13:06:47 mx01 spamd[94924]: got connection ove
Hello,
I'm trying to setup spamassassin (for the first time) and using spamd
over a network. The problem I'm getting is that no matter what I do I
can only get spamd to listed on 127.0.0.1.
I'm testing with
spamc -c -d 192.168.0.80
> >I thought the autolearn=spam is at a score of 12.
> >What are the reasons that it still is autolearned?
>
> RCVD_IN_SORBS -- hmm, that's an odd hit.. There's no rule
> named that in SA
I had sorbs in airmax.cf and frenchrules.cf and have uncommented these
rules.
Why is sorbs a no-show? Is s
On Friday, February 18, 2005, 8:35:35 PM, Jay Levitt wrote:
> I have SA 3.01 running under mimedefang 2.43 with sendmail 8.13.1. At
> some point, SA seems to stop doing lookups on the DNSBLs; spam gets
> through that is listed in multiple BLs; if I check manually with
> spamassassin -t, it dete
Michael,
I apologize for the perceived or real hostilityPeople have told me
of that implementation before, which that implemenation is perfectly
fine with me. More power to them, best wishes, and all the best. Let's
put some added value into NetMail which I think is a great product and
help
On Sat, Feb 19, 2005 at 01:16:39AM -0500, Joe Flowers wrote:
> I know of that implemenation. And, I'm sure there are pluses and minus
> to both implementations.
>
> I've already tested my replacement spamd on SA 3.02 and it works the
> same with no problems found.
> I know there are a deprecated
I know of that implemenation. And, I'm sure there are pluses and minus
to both implementations.
I've already tested my replacement spamd on SA 3.02 and it works the
same with no problems found.
I know there are a deprecated call or two (get_hits for example) but I
see no reason that the new cal
On Sat, Feb 19, 2005 at 12:55:24AM -0500, Joe Flowers wrote:
> I'll try to keep it as short as possible.
>
> By my preference and from hearing continuing horror stories about spamd,
> I have a C program in the place of spamd. It makes calls to Perl - Perl
> is "embedded" in the C program. The C
I'll try to keep it as short as possible.
By my preference and from hearing continuing horror stories about spamd,
I have a C program in the place of spamd. It makes calls to Perl - Perl
is "embedded" in the C program. The C spamd replacement talks to a C
program running on our NetWare NetMail (
I have SA 3.01 running under mimedefang 2.43 with sendmail 8.13.1. At
some point, SA seems to stop doing lookups on the DNSBLs; spam gets
through that is listed in multiple BLs; if I check manually with
spamassassin -t, it detects the BL entry, even if I run it moments after
the spam was recei
17 matches
Mail list logo
