On 2014-07-30 16:06, Noel Butler wrote:
Certainly have done it on employers network before (a public ISP), and
would have no problem doing it again if the need arose.
There is no such thing as 'too big' when it comes to handling the shit
storm of spam that gets spewed out of some organisations,
On Thu, 2014-07-31 at 09:06 +1000, Noel Butler wrote:
> Certainly have done it on employers network before (a public ISP), and
> would have no problem doing it again if the need arose.
> There is no such thing as 'too big' when it comes to handling the shit
> storm of spam that gets spewed out of
On Wed, 2014-07-30 at 09:12 -0400, David F. Skoll wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Jul 2014 09:34:30 +1000
> Noel Butler wrote:
>
> > This is the exact attitude as to why they wont get off their arses,
> > because people think they are too big to block. be damned if I care,
> > I have blocked yahoo and gmai
Hello
I have Bayes in SQL for each users (emails) on test server.
SA is trigger by
/usr/local/bin/spamc -U /var/run/spamd/spamd.socket -u $local_part@$domain
My Bayes dosen't auto learn SPAM, only HAM
Some email users have 38 HAM learned but SPAM 0;/
Some settings from userpref table
| $GLOB
On 7/30/2014 10:47 AM, Benny Pedersen wrote:
On July 30, 2014 12:28:44 PM ML mail wrote:
It looks like SpamAssassin tries to INSERT an entry (e-mail address)
which already exists. Shouldn't SpamAssassin AWL code first check if
an entry exists or not and use UPDATE instead of INSERT if an entr
On 2014-07-30 06:12, David F. Skoll wrote:
On Wed, 30 Jul 2014 09:34:30 +1000
Noel Butler wrote:
This is the exact attitude as to why they wont get off their arses,
because people think they are too big to block. be damned if I care,
I have blocked yahoo and gmail before, and I dare say I'll h
On July 30, 2014 12:28:44 PM ML mail wrote:
It looks like SpamAssassin tries to INSERT an entry (e-mail address) which
already exists. Shouldn't SpamAssassin AWL code first check if an entry
exists or not and use UPDATE instead of INSERT if an entry already exists?
awl current code does not
Thanks for confirming! I will then simply ignore...
On Wednesday, July 30, 2014 3:43 PM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
On 7/30/2014 9:37 AM, ML mail wrote:
>
>So if I understand correctly this behavior is expected/normal and not an error
>from my side (for example having done something wrong
On 7/30/2014 9:37 AM, ML mail wrote:
So if I understand correctly this behavior is expected/normal and not
an error from my side (for example having done something wrong in the
config file or so).
That would be my synopsis, yes.
I am using the database schema delivered with SA which for the awl table is:
CREATE TABLE awl (
username varchar(100) NOT NULL default '',
email varchar(255) NOT NULL default '',
ip varchar(40) NOT NULL default '',
count bigint NOT NULL default '0',
totscore float NOT NULL default '0',
On Wed, 30 Jul 2014 09:34:30 +1000
Noel Butler wrote:
> This is the exact attitude as to why they wont get off their arses,
> because people think they are too big to block. be damned if I care,
> I have blocked yahoo and gmail before, and I dare say I'll have to
> again sometime.
You don't hav
On 7/30/2014 6:28 AM, ML mail wrote:
Hi,
I am using a PostgreSQL database to store the AutoWhiteList entries
but from time to time I see in my PostgreSQL log file the following
entries:
2014-07-30 12:07:42 CEST ERROR: duplicate key value violates unique
constraint "awl_pkey"
2014-07-30 12:
Hi,
I am using a PostgreSQL database to store the AutoWhiteList entries but from
time to time I see in my PostgreSQL log file the following entries:
2014-07-30 12:07:42 CEST ERROR: duplicate key value violates unique constraint
"awl_pkey"
2014-07-30 12:07:42 CEST DETAIL: Key (username, email,
13 matches
Mail list logo
