On Jan 27, 2016, at 9:18 AM, Björn Keil wrote:
> I am using SpamAssassin 3.3.1, installed via the Ubuntu 10.04
An ancient version of SA on a 6 year-old OS?
--
A sadder and a wiser man he rose the morrow morn.
Am 27.01.2016 um 17:18 schrieb Björn Keil:
I am using SpamAssassin 3.3.1, installed via the Ubuntu 10.04 package
system, and am trying to figure out how it determines which rules to
use. It appears my SpamAssassin uses completely outdated rules, including
DNS_FROM_AHBL_RHSBL, which queries a l
On Wed, 9 Jun 2010, Matt Kettler wrote:
On 6/9/2010 12:11 PM, LuKreme wrote:
On 8-Jun-2010, at 19:34, Matt Kettler wrote:
Legacy version, 3.2.5 (rarely updated)
Even better:
Unsupported version 3.2.5 (critical updates only)
or
Deprecated version: 3.2.5 (critical updates only, if at all)
On 6/9/2010 12:11 PM, LuKreme wrote:
> On 8-Jun-2010, at 19:34, Matt Kettler wrote:
>
>> Legacy version, 3.2.5 (rarely updated)
>>
> Even better:
>
> Unsupported version 3.2.5 (critical updates only)
>
> or
>
> Deprecated version: 3.2.5 (critical updates only, if at all)
>
>
Well, unsupp
On 9-Jun-2010, at 10:25, Alex wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
>>> It would be great if you could document exactly what features are
>>> exclusively available in 3.3.x? In other words, can you quantify how
>>> much is being missed by continuing to use v3.2.5?
>>
>> All new rules. All current spam-fighting measu
Hi,
>> It would be great if you could document exactly what features are
>> exclusively available in 3.3.x? In other words, can you quantify how
>> much is being missed by continuing to use v3.2.5?
>
> All new rules. All current spam-fighting measures.
Yes, I realize that. I was hoping for specif
On 8-Jun-2010, at 21:22, Alex wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
>> We also very loudly repeatedly state on the list that if you want to
>> keep abreast of the latest spam, you need to be running the latest
>> version of the codebase (can't take advantage of new features without
>> it!), but don't have that clear
On 8-Jun-2010, at 19:34, Matt Kettler wrote:
>
> Legacy version, 3.2.5 (rarely updated)
Even better:
Unsupported version 3.2.5 (critical updates only)
or
Deprecated version: 3.2.5 (critical updates only, if at all)
--
I collect blondes and bottles. ~Marlowe
On 6/8/2010 11:22 PM, Alex wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
>> We also very loudly repeatedly state on the list that if you want to
>> keep abreast of the latest spam, you need to be running the latest
>> version of the codebase (can't take advantage of new features without
>> it!), but don't have that clearly
Hi,
> We also very loudly repeatedly state on the list that if you want to
> keep abreast of the latest spam, you need to be running the latest
> version of the codebase (can't take advantage of new features without
> it!), but don't have that clearly documented either.
It would be great if you
On 6/8/2010 5:48 PM, James Ralston wrote:
> On 2010-05-21 at 03:09+02 Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
>
>
>> 3.2.x is in maintenance, and gets emergency rule updates
>> *exclusively*. As it has been for quite a long time.
>>
>> 3.3.x uses a new rule update model, and gets frequent updates. IFF
>> t
On 2010-05-21 at 03:09+02 Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
> 3.2.x is in maintenance, and gets emergency rule updates
> *exclusively*. As it has been for quite a long time.
>
> 3.3.x uses a new rule update model, and gets frequent updates. IFF
> the mass-check corpus is large enough.
And exactly whe
On Thu, 2010-05-20 at 21:34 -0400, Robert Palmer wrote:
> yum install insisted I have current version so I used cpan which got me
> to 3.3.1. Should I stop there or consider 3.3.2 or 3.4.x?
http://spamassassin.apache.org/
Did you have a look there, yet? 3.3.1 is the latest stable release.
3.3.2
On fre 21 maj 2010 03:09:05 CEST, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote
Ignoring your (humble or not) opinion for a second... 3.3.x is the
latest stable.
thanks for clearing up this mess :)
3.3.1 is not being stable here on gentoo, there is a few problems with
spf check, and i will try to find where its
yum install insisted I have current version so I used cpan which got me
to 3.3.1. Should I stop there or consider 3.3.2 or 3.4.x?
Thanks
On 5/20/2010 9:09 PM, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
On Fri, 2010-05-21 at 01:26 +0200, Benny Pedersen wrote:
I am running spamassassin version 3.2.4 and no
On Fri, 2010-05-21 at 01:26 +0200, Benny Pedersen wrote:
> > > I am running spamassassin version 3.2.4 and notice my rules have
> > > not updated (sa-update) for many months and I have started getting
> > > a lot of nasty spam coming through.
> imho 3.2.5 is still latest stable
Ignoring your
On Thu, May 20, 2010 4:26 pm, Benny Pedersen wrote:
> On fre 21 maj 2010 00:05:26 CEST, Michael Scheidell wrote
>> On 5/20/10 6:00 PM, Robert Palmer wrote:
>>> I am running spamassassin version 3.2.4 and notice my rules have
>>> not updated (sa-update) for many months and I have started getting
>>>
On fre 21 maj 2010 00:05:26 CEST, Michael Scheidell wrote
On 5/20/10 6:00 PM, Robert Palmer wrote:
I am running spamassassin version 3.2.4 and notice my rules have
not updated (sa-update) for many months and I have started getting
a lot of nasty spam coming through.
just upgrade to SA 3.3.1
On 5/20/10 6:00 PM, Robert Palmer wrote:
I am running spamassassin version 3.2.4 and notice my rules have not
updated (sa-update) for many months and I have started getting a lot
of nasty spam coming through.
just upgrade to SA 3.3.1
only current versions of SA have current rule updates.
-
19 matches
Mail list logo
