On Wed, 30 Nov 2011 08:23:59 -0500, Michael Scheidell wrote:
sed -i '' -e '/INSERT INTO bayes_seen/s/INTO/IGNORE INTO/' MySQL.pm
(hey SA folks.. any reason not to just put that into 3.4.0? won't
hurt anything, will it?)
or simply just
ALTER TABLE `bayes_seen` ENGINE = INNODB
no, that
On Wed, 30 Nov 2011, Sergio wrote:
I use MailScanner to check on my emails and I have not yet found a way to
train Bayes, I will check on that.
That's going to be critical.
On the mean time, I have learned not to check in "ALL" headers, I have
redefined my first rules and now I have seen a b
On 11/30/2011 03:59 AM, Martin Gregorie wrote:
> On Tue, 2011-11-29 at 14:22 -0800, Adam Katz wrote:
>> You might want to consider Regexp::Assemble for your tool, though
>> that would require using perl. This would cause your man page's
>> example rule to result in something like this:
>>
>>
Thank you Adam,
I have been working hard in learning a lot of things about antispam rules
and I appreciate all the inputs that the list is giving to me.
I use MailScanner to check on my emails and I have not yet found a way to
train Bayes, I will check on that.
On the mean time, I have learned no
On Wed, 30 Nov 2011 08:23:59 -0500, Michael Scheidell wrote:
sed -i '' -e '/INSERT INTO bayes_seen/s/INTO/IGNORE INTO/'
MySQL.pm
(hey SA folks.. any reason not to just put that into 3.4.0? won't
hurt anything, will it?)
or simply just
ALTER TABLE `bayes_seen` ENGINE = INNODB
On Wed, 30 Nov 2011 12:40:02 +, Paul Houselander wrote:
Then when someone complains ill enable the rules to stop them
bothering me.
let users self write rules in userconf if thay do not want to
unsubscribe, if you are helpfull writeing rules, thay will later
complain about missing mailli
On Wed, 30 Nov 2011 08:25:43 -0800, John Hardin wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Nov 2011, Walter Hurry wrote:
>> Why replicate? Why not just share the same database?
>
> Latency and reliability of the link between the "geographically separate
> locations". Replication is typically robust in the face of unre
On Wed, 30 Nov 2011, Walter Hurry wrote:
On Wed, 30 Nov 2011 09:11:49 +0100, Robert Schetterer wrote:
Am 30.11.2011 09:06, schrieb Matus UHLAR - fantomas:
On 30.11.11 00:17, Alex wrote:
I have two fedora15 boxes that process mail for a few domains, and
recently set up bayes in mysql for each
On Wed, 30 Nov 2011 15:14:33 + (UTC), Walter Hurry
wrote:
>On Wed, 30 Nov 2011 09:11:49 +0100, Robert Schetterer wrote:
>
>> Am 30.11.2011 09:06, schrieb Matus UHLAR - fantomas:
>>> On 30.11.11 00:17, Alex wrote:
I have two fedora15 boxes that process mail for a few domains, and
rec
On 11/30/2011 4:32 AM, spamassas...@lists.grepular.com wrote:
"GNU/Linux" is the best example of this IMO.
IMO, that is the most controversial example you could have picked. I
believe Debian and FSF are the only people that recognize that branding
for Linux. Not arguing one side or the other
30.11.2011 16:37, Mark Martinec kirjoitti:
>> I have set up DKIM on our corporate mail hosted by GMail. Google
>> assigned a TXT record and our DNS-provider set it.
>>
>> I send a mail from GMail from the Web UI and from my Thunderbird to
>> myself, and SA always triggers that rule.
>>
>> What does
On Wed, 30 Nov 2011 09:11:49 +0100, Robert Schetterer wrote:
> Am 30.11.2011 09:06, schrieb Matus UHLAR - fantomas:
>> On 30.11.11 00:17, Alex wrote:
>>> I have two fedora15 boxes that process mail for a few domains, and
>>> recently set up bayes in mysql for each of them. The servers are in
>>> g
I have two fedora15 boxes that process mail for a few domains, and
recently set up bayes in mysql for each of them. The servers are in
geographically different locations, a few hops from each other. Since
they both process mail for the same domains, I thought it made sense
to share the database be
> I have set up DKIM on our corporate mail hosted by GMail. Google
> assigned a TXT record and our DNS-provider set it.
>
> I send a mail from GMail from the Web UI and from my Thunderbird to
> myself, and SA always triggers that rule.
>
> What does it mean? Is not valid?
Whatever of mail reache
On 2011-11-30 13:40, Paul Houselander wrote:
Hi
Bit of an unusal question but ive been getting increasing questions of
why spamassasin didnt classify an email as spam.
When I look at the mail its normally an opt-in mailing list of some kind
and therefore spamassasin is correct in not classifyin
Hi all,
I have two fedora15 boxes that process mail for a few domains, and
recently set up bayes in mysql for each of them. The servers are in
geographically different locations, a few hops from each other. Since
they both process mail for the same domains, I thought it made sense
to share the da
Hi
Bit of an unusal question but ive been getting increasing questions of
why spamassasin didnt classify an email as spam.
When I look at the mail its normally an opt-in mailing list of some
kind and therefore spamassasin is correct in not classifying it as spam.
I was on icsa's anti-spam c
On Wed, 2011-11-30 at 12:40 +, Paul Houselander wrote:
> Hi
>
> Bit of an unusal question but ive been getting increasing questions of
> why spamassasin didnt classify an email as spam.
>
> When I look at the mail its normally an opt-in mailing list of some kind
> and therefore spamassasin
Hi
Bit of an unusal question but ive been getting increasing questions of
why spamassasin didnt classify an email as spam.
When I look at the mail its normally an opt-in mailing list of some kind
and therefore spamassasin is correct in not classifying it as spam.
I have had numerous convers
On Tue, 2011-11-29 at 14:22 -0800, Adam Katz wrote:
> If you want to fork the thread into a tangent, please change the subject
> so other responses to it don't follow you. Also, don't respond to the
> parts of the thread you are not forking; those belong in another message
> in the original threa
I have set up DKIM on our corporate mail hosted by GMail. Google
assigned a TXT record and our DNS-provider set it.
I send a mail from GMail from the Web UI and from my Thunderbird to
myself, and SA always triggers that rule.
What does it mean? Is not valid?
--
There are more things in heaven
On 30/11/11 07:17, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
>>> I've attached version 2.0 with this email (it's the clean version without
>>> all the comments :) ). I've pretty much finished up the definitions and
>>> some cleaning up. Again, I would really enjoy feedback!
>>
>> Everywhere you say "SpamAssassin"
Dorian,
* Dorian Chan :
> Hello again,
> I've attached version 2.0 with this email (it's the clean version without
> all the comments :) ). I've pretty much finished up the definitions and
> some cleaning up. Again, I would really enjoy feedback!
I've attached an edited version that adds puts SA
Am 30.11.2011 09:06, schrieb Matus UHLAR - fantomas:
> On 30.11.11 00:17, Alex wrote:
>> I have two fedora15 boxes that process mail for a few domains, and
>> recently set up bayes in mysql for each of them. The servers are in
>> geographically different locations, a few hops from each other. Since
On 30.11.11 00:17, Alex wrote:
I have two fedora15 boxes that process mail for a few domains, and
recently set up bayes in mysql for each of them. The servers are in
geographically different locations, a few hops from each other. Since
they both process mail for the same domains, I thought it mad
25 matches
Mail list logo
