On Thu, October 5, 2006 21:38, John Andersen wrote:
> I'm pretty sure this is going to be a major problem for many many sites.
> Lots of people are running various specialized rules in separate .cf files.
i did:
mv /etc/mail/spamassassin ~/tmp
mkdir -p /etc/mail/spamassassin
sa-update
cp ~/tmp /
Daryl C. W. O'Shea wrote:
For now you'll have to disable the score lines while you do sa-update.
Temporarily renaming whatever.cf to whatever.cf-disabled is probably the
easiest way to go about it.
BTW, you could also delete or comment out the "exit 2;" around line 375
of sa-update.
Daryl
Stuart Johnston wrote:
Could you just add appropriate ifplugin lines for a more permanent fix?
Unfortunately, no. Everything in the local site config dir is loaded,
including the pre files. The default rules aren't loaded though... a
poor attempt at not bothering to lint rules that are nev
Daryl C. W. O'Shea wrote:
Mike Grau wrote:
Since upgrading to SpamAssassin 3.1.6, running sa-update yields
# sa-update
config: warning: score set for non-existent rule BAYES_50
config: warning: score set for non-existent rule BAYES_05
...
error: lint check of current site config failed, canno
On Thursday 05 October 2006 11:31, Daryl C. W. O'Shea wrote:
> > Previously I've set some custom scores for stock rules in
> > /etc/mail/spamassassin/whatever.cf
> > without changing the rule definitions or descriptions. Can I not do this
> > and need to define the "body BAYES_99" and "describe BAY
Mike Grau wrote:
Since upgrading to SpamAssassin 3.1.6, running sa-update yields
# sa-update
config: warning: score set for non-existent rule BAYES_50
config: warning: score set for non-existent rule BAYES_05
...
error: lint check of current site config failed, cannot continue.
I assume this
Since upgrading to SpamAssassin 3.1.6, running sa-update yields
# sa-update
config: warning: score set for non-existent rule BAYES_50
config: warning: score set for non-existent rule BAYES_05
config: warning: score set for non-existent rule BAYES_00
config: warning: score set for non-existent rule
At 06:37 AM 4/8/2005, Jon Gerdes wrote:
Could someone please explain this for me:
Header from an e-mail I received:
¯-8<--
X-Spam-Status: No, score=4.6 required=5.6 tests=BAYES_40,DATE_IN_PAST_12_24,
RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET autolear
ower the score. However I'd think that
RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET should crank up the score by a good amount and more
than compensate for bayes.
Loren
- Original Message -
From: "Jon Gerdes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Friday, April 08, 2005 3:37 AM
Subject: Local scores
pril 08, 2005 3:37 AM
Subject: Local scores
> *** Before acting on this email or opening any attachment you are advised
to read the disclaimer at the end of this email ***
>
> Could someone please explain this for me:
>
> Header from an e-mail I received:
&
--
Note that I've scored up RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET to 5.0.
I know that the other local scores work OK becuause I can sent GTUBE in for a
pretty large score
Cheers
Jon Gerdes
*** Disclaimer ***
The information contained in this E-Mail and any subsequent correspondence may
be subj
11 matches
Mail list logo