Dr Robert Young wrote on Thu, 23 Jun 2005 22:04:57 -0400:
> So when using CPAN to get Sys::Syslog with Perl 5.8.3, it states that
> it requires Perl 5.8.7 as a depedancy.
>
> Just checking to be sure that the later version of Perl is needed if
> one is intending to use SA 2.6 and/or 3.0 with
I have Perl 5.8.3 installed. I am going to be installing SA 2.6, and
then perform an upgrade to SA 3.0 as part of a test before attempting a
"real" upgrade on an existing production system.
I noted in O'Reilly's Spamassassin book that Sys::Syslog is listed as
being requi
On Thu, Mar 31, 2005 at 10:12:38PM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Has someone tested Mysql 5.0 with SA3.0?
>
Yes. Are you just asking? or did you find some sort of problem?
I haven't found any problems so far, but all of my testing has been
focused on BayesSQL.
Michael
pgpt1rIyLXb2C.p
Hello
Has someone tested Mysql 5.0 with SA3.0?
At 02:05 AM 2/11/2005, Monty Ree wrote:
I have upgraded SA 3.0.2 at linux+sendmail.
after that, I have found that so lots of messages at /var/log/maillog like
below.
AFAIK, these messages are useless for me and thess eat some resources like
CPU, HDD..etc.. .
So is there any method to disable thes
Hello, all.
I have upgraded SA 3.0.2 at linux+sendmail.
after that, I have found that so lots of messages at /var/log/maillog like
below.
AFAIK, these messages are useless for me and thess eat some resources like
CPU, HDD..etc.. .
So is there any method to disable these messages?
Thanks in advan
Kurt
yeah ran into a similar problem with --lint option...not very nice error
messages. Must check bug list one this one...
I'd double check all the syntax for the options against the docs...
--
Martin Hepworth
Snr Systems Administrator
Solid State Logic
Tel: +44 (0)1865 842300
Kurt Buff wrote:
A
At 03:33 PM 11/30/2004, Kurt Buff wrote:
Ran spamassassin --lint as root, and got the following error:
'Argument "" isn't numeric in numeric eq (==) at
/usr/local/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.8.5/Mail/SpamAssassin/Conf/Parser.pm line
578.'
Where might I start in trying to correct this?
bayes_use_hapaxes
All,
This is a relatively fresh install, new as of last week, not an upgrade of
an old system.
Ran spamassassin --lint as root, and got the following error:
'Argument "" isn't numeric in numeric eq (==) at
/usr/local/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.8.5/Mail/SpamAssassin/Conf/Parser.pm line
578.'
Where mi
The announcement for SA 3 mentioned that anti-fraud rules from Matt Yackley
had been added, so when I upgraded I removed the 9_sare_fraud ruleset.
However, I've noticed that some lotto scams were getting through.
Just testing with on that didn't trigger any standard fraud rules, it did
trigge
Hello Matt,
On Mon, Oct 18, 2004 at 11:23:06AM -0400, Matt Kettler wrote:
> man Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::URIDNSBL
>
> uridnsbl_timeout N (default: 2)
> Specify the maximum number of seconds to wait for a result before
> giving up on the lookup. Note that this is in addition
At 10:50 AM 10/18/2004, Thomas Kaehn wrote:
Hi,
I am using amavisd-new along with SpamAssassin 3.0. Recently I've
noticed, that a mail couldn't be delivered, because SA timed out as it
had to do many DNS lookups.
The mail had lots of URLs in its body. It is not really SpamAssassin's
or amavisd-new'
I built and installed SpamAssassin 3.0 on my RedHat EL/WS system.
I built it using the command:
perl Makefile.PL PREFIX=/usr/local
I chose to use PREFIX because I'd like to keep everything associated
with SpamAssassin on my /usr/local partition, out of the way of system
upgrades, etc.
The
Hi,
I am using amavisd-new along with SpamAssassin 3.0. Recently I've
noticed, that a mail couldn't be delivered, because SA timed out as it
had to do many DNS lookups.
The mail had lots of URLs in its body. It is not really SpamAssassin's
or amavisd-new's fault. But is there a solution to this p
>
> At 07:24 AM 10/14/2004, BG Mahesh wrote:
>
>
>
> >How do I fix this problem?
>
>
> Remember when the "perl Makefile.pl" warned you that checking network rules
> could cause make test to fail, but you turned them on anyway?
>
Yes, I turned it on. On 3 machines I had installed it witho
>
> Hi,
>
> On Thu, 14 Oct 2004 16:54:04 +0530 "BG Mahesh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > I am trying to install SA 3.0 on RedHat linux. During testing the error
> > I get is,
> >
> > % make test
> > [dnsbl test failures]
>
At 07:24 AM 10/14/2004, BG Mahesh wrote:
How do I fix this problem?
Remember when the "perl Makefile.pl" warned you that checking network rules
could cause make test to fail, but you turned them on anyway?
Check network rules during 'make test' (test scripts may fail due
to network pro
Hi,
On Thu, 14 Oct 2004 16:54:04 +0530 "BG Mahesh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I am trying to install SA 3.0 on RedHat linux. During testing the error
> I get is,
>
> % make test
> [dnsbl test failures]
>
> How do I fix this problem?
What does:
p
hi
I am trying to install SA 3.0 on RedHat linux. During testing the error I get
is,
% make test
PERL_DL_NONLAZY=1 /usr/bin/perl "-MExtUtils::Command::MM" "-e" "test_harness(0,
'blib/lib', 'blib/arch')" t/*.t
t/bayesdbm..
From: "Kai Schaetzl" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Mike Zanker wrote on Sun, 10 Oct 2004 17:52:36 +0100:
>
> > Yes, I am using that, but I thought USER_IN_BLACKLIST related to
> > personal blacklists, not SURBL stuff.
> >
>
> It does not relate to SURBL. It relates to rules, no matter in which *.cf
> file
On 10 October 2004 20:44 +0200 Kai Schaetzl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
It does not relate to SURBL. It relates to rules, no matter in which
*.cf file they are in /etc/mail/spamassassin. The rulename is
relevant, not the filename.
Ah, OK.
Thanks,
Mike.
Mike Zanker wrote on Sun, 10 Oct 2004 17:52:36 +0100:
> Yes, I am using that, but I thought USER_IN_BLACKLIST related to
> personal blacklists, not SURBL stuff.
>
It does not relate to SURBL. It relates to rules, no matter in which *.cf
file they are in /etc/mail/spamassassin. The rulename is r
On 10 October 2004 11:24 -0400 Matt Kettler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Are you sure you're not using sa-blacklist.cf from SURBL?
Yes, I am using that, but I thought USER_IN_BLACKLIST related to
personal blacklists, not SURBL stuff.
Mike.
lf. ;)
I believe that it is a bug in SA 3.0. This is a fresh installation of SA,
no blacklists have been created and the e-mail address was previously unknown.
Having searched back through the archives there are a couple of other
reports of this 'phenomenon'.
Are you sure you're
You wrote:
MZ> On 09 October 2004 18:40 -0400 Theo Van Dinter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
MZ> wrote:
>> Got me, you have to go hunting around and find out. I have no way to
>> tell you what's on your box, but I can tell you the entries aren't
>> from SpamAssass
On 09 October 2004 18:40 -0400 Theo Van Dinter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Got me, you have to go hunting around and find out. I have no way to
tell you what's on your box, but I can tell you the entries aren't
from SpamAssassin itself. ;)
I believe that it is a bug in SA 3.0.
On Sat, Oct 09, 2004 at 11:24:19PM +0100, Mike Zanker wrote:
> >There are no default blacklist entries in SpamAssassin.
> Exactly, so where did it come from?
Got me, you have to go hunting around and find out. I have no way to tell you
what's on your box, but I can tell you the entries aren't fro
On 09 October 2004 16:19 -0400 Theo Van Dinter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Well, yes you do. ;)
I do what?
There are no default blacklist entries in SpamAssassin.
Exactly, so where did it come from?
Mike.
On Sat, Oct 09, 2004 at 09:09:12PM +0100, Mike Zanker wrote:
> scored over 100 because of USER_IN_BLACKLIST. Now, I don't have any
> blacklists defined anywhere
> So, this seems to be a false positive. Anyone else seen it happening?
Well, yes you do. ;) There are no default blacklist entries in
Today I received a virus (Gibe-F) from an unknown e-mail address - it
scored over 100 because of USER_IN_BLACKLIST. Now, I don't have any
blacklists defined anywhere - in fact, SA is run only by MailScanner as
user mail.
So, this seems to be a false positive. Anyone else seen it happening?
Than
Justin Mason wrote on Fri, 08 Oct 2004 09:39:15 -0700:
> So you wind up with a very big, but unexpirable, db?
yes. I can expire it with the trick mentioned, but then it blows most of
the db. And the next expire fails again until I play other tricks or wait
long enough. F.i. I can dump the stuff
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Kai Schaetzl writes:
> The problem seems to exists on all of our Bayes databases and I think the
> cause is not "bad" data, but simply the way the SA expiry algorithm works.
> There are no negative atimes or atimes in the future. If the database
>
The problem seems to exists on all of our Bayes databases and I think the
cause is not "bad" data, but simply the way the SA expiry algorithm works.
There are no negative atimes or atimes in the future. If the database
contains tokens from a wide time range it's not able to calculate a
reasonab
On Wed, 6 Oct 2004, Luis Hernán Otegui wrote:
In my setup this is not an option, because I run SA as a milter, via
spamass-milter. If every process has to die after the scan, it cannot
pass the results of the scan to Sendmail (at least, this is what
happened after I tried this option, so I kept on
In my setup this is not an option, because I run SA as a milter, via
spamass-milter. If every process has to die after the scan, it cannot
pass the results of the scan to Sendmail (at least, this is what
happened after I tried this option, so I kept on receiving messages
like this:
Oct 4 09:27:55
I had this problem till I set the max per child option to = 1
This caused spamd to kill the process used to scan every msg once it's
done.
Not the best answer I know but it keeps it in check
> Is there a Perl equivalent to the Unix 'setrlimit' or 'ulimit'
> function? (IE something to set the max data size that a process
> is allowed to use).
I use djb's softlimit and supervise my spamd process with daemontools.
I softlimit spamd at 100MB just to prevent childs from running away with
Hi,
emails come through with very well known medicaments in the mail body such
as (I replaced 'V' with 'X'): Xiagra.
How can I fix it?
Results:
X-Spam-Level: ***
X-Spam-Status: No, score=3.2 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_60,DRUGS_DIET,
DRUGS_ERECTILE,MSGID_DOLLARS autolearn=no version=3.0.0
> On Tue, 5 Oct 2004, Jon Trulson wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 4 Oct 2004, Luis Hernan Otegui wrote:
>>
>> > Well, a weekend update:
>> > Nothing has changed here. I removed EVERYTHING (except for local.cf)
>> > from /etc/mail/spamassassin, and still it chews as much memory as it
>> > could get. I limited t
On Tue, 5 Oct 2004, Jon Trulson wrote:
On Mon, 4 Oct 2004, Luis Hernan Otegui wrote:
> Well, a weekend update:
> Nothing has changed here. I removed EVERYTHING (except for local.cf)
> from /etc/mail/spamassassin, and still it chews as much memory as it
> could get. I limited the number of childs to
On Mon, 4 Oct 2004, Luis Hernán Otegui wrote:
Well, a weekend update:
Nothing has changed here. I removed EVERYTHING (except for local.cf)
from /etc/mail/spamassassin, and still it chews as much memory as it
could get. I limited the number of childs to five (removed the -m
switch in the startup scr
On Fri, 1 Oct 2004, Morris Jones wrote:
I found 3.0 pushing my machine into swapping as well this afternoon -- a
first for me. I stopped and restarted my smtp server and spamd, and it's
back to normal for now.
I'm beginning to think I might be better off running spamassassin in
unique processes in
Is that still broken in 3.0? I thought sure they would have fixed that
blank line parsing problem!
Loren
> I've noticed some technique to avoid running SURBL check.
> There's an appropriate part of spam message:
>
> http://aircraft.com href=
>
> "http://
On Mon, Oct 04, 2004 at 06:29:44AM, Asif Iqbal wrote:
> OOPS! I mistyped the version number
>
> This bug is part of SA 3.0
>
> On Sun, Oct 03, 2004 at 06:25:59PM, Asif Iqbal wrote:
> > I am not sure if it is a bug. Here is what I am experiencing.
> >
> > The /et
On Mon, Oct 04, 2004 at 06:29:44AM, Asif Iqbal wrote:
> OOPS! I mistyped the version number
>
> This bug is part of SA 3.0
>
> On Sun, Oct 03, 2004 at 06:25:59PM, Asif Iqbal wrote:
> > I am not sure if it is a bug. Here is what I am experiencing.
> >
> > The /et
Hello Asif,
Sunday, October 3, 2004, 12:43:43 PM, you wrote:
AI> I am getting 169 warnings in my spamassassin --lint report after
AI> upgrading the SA from 2.63 to 3.0
As Loren said, your SARE and other rule sets are out of date. These are
fixed, and if you replace all of your custom rule sets w
Hello,
I've noticed some technique to avoid running SURBL check.
There's an appropriate part of spam message:
http://aircraft.com href=
"http://ca-t.com/free/?org";>MORE INFO
HERE
http://leveled.com href=
"http://ca-t.com/rm.html";>no thanx
--
Well, a weekend update:
Nothing has changed here. I removed EVERYTHING (except for local.cf)
from /etc/mail/spamassassin, and still it chews as much memory as it
could get. I limited the number of childs to five (removed the -m
switch in the startup script), and nothing changed. The only
"improveme
OOPS! I mistyped the version number
This bug is part of SA 3.0
On Sun, Oct 03, 2004 at 06:25:59PM, Asif Iqbal wrote:
> I am not sure if it is a bug. Here is what I am experiencing.
>
> The /etc/mail/spamassassin folder is 775 mode and spamd process owner is
> in the part of the
On Mon, 4 Oct 2004 02:28:34 -0700, Loren Wilton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Are you seeing any net tests being rul at all?
Yes, but for some reason only on a portion of the messages being processed.
> if not, you need to make
> sure that you have net tests activated, and that SA is happy with
Are you seeing any net tests being rul at all? if not, you need to make
sure that you have net tests activated, and that SA is happy with the
version of Net::DNS (and a few other things) that re required.
If you are seeing SURBL working most of the time but not all, it sounds like
you may have ne
> Just a short note to say a big THANK YOU for SA 3. After I installed and
> restarted, without any additional configuration changes and just by
upgrading
> the bayes database, I am getting under 10 spam a day getting through
> 'unnoticed' as opposed to 60-80 before. I am running without any networ
Hi All,
I have a sneaking suspicion that this has been covered recently, but
my cursorary searches of the archives showed nothing.
We've just rolled SA 3 out on one of our mail clusters, but the URIBL
tests seems to be skipped on some messages, leaving them scored too
low to be actioned. I know
Just a short note to say a big THANK YOU for SA 3. After I installed and
restarted, without any additional configuration changes and just by upgrading
the bayes database, I am getting under 10 spam a day getting through
'unnoticed' as opposed to 60-80 before. I am running without any network tests
> warning: description for SARE_HEAD_XLIB_INDY2 is over 50 chars (159 of
this type)
> warning: description exists for non-existent rule SARE_RD_SAFE_MKSHRT (4
of this type)
> warning: score set for non-existent rule SARE_RD_SAFE_GT (4 of this type)
> warning: rule 'VIRUS_WARNING_MIMEDEFANG' is over
Hi
I am getting 169 warnings in my spamassassin --lint report after
upgrading the SA from 2.63 to 3.0
These warnings are compiled of the following type of messages
warning: description for SARE_HEAD_XLIB_INDY2 is over 50 chars (159 of this
type)
warning: description exists for non-existent rul
Hi!
I have an Mandrake system which had to be upgrade from 10.0 Official
to 10.1 Community. The upgrade was not full correct, the spamassassin
package was 3.0 the spamassassin-tool was 2.63 after upgrading. Now
spamassassin, spamassassin-tools and perl-Mail-SpamAssassin
packages are all 3.0.0,
On Sat, Oct 02, 2004 at 09:43:31PM, Alex S Moore wrote:
> On Sat, 2004-10-02 at 21:40 -0400, Asif Iqbal wrote:
> > On Sat, Oct 02, 2004 at 03:10:56PM, Bob Proulx wrote:
> > qmailq is the owner of spamd processses and has read/write permission on
> > bayes_* files through the spam group
> >
> > (ro
spamd.
Ray Dzek
Network Operations Supervisor
Specialized Bicycle Components
-Original Message-
From: Asif Iqbal [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, October 02, 2004 2:02 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Bayes R/O tie failed with SA 3.0
Hi All
I just upgraded my SA from 2.63
On Sat, 2004-10-02 at 21:40 -0400, Asif Iqbal wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 02, 2004 at 03:10:56PM, Bob Proulx wrote:
> qmailq is the owner of spamd processses and has read/write permission on
> bayes_* files through the spam group
>
> (root)@qmail:/etc/mail/spamassassin# ls -al bayes_*
> -rw-rw-r-- 1 ro
On Sat, Oct 02, 2004 at 03:10:56PM, Bob Proulx wrote:
> Asif Iqbal wrote:
> > I just upgraded my SA from 2.63 to 3.0. I did the sa-learn --sync after
> > the upgrade and the restarted spamd. Now I am seeing this error in the
> > log
> >
> > @4000415f15ec35d6286c Cannot open bayes databases
>
I have a similar situation, and I have removed all my rule sets. Here is
the output from top
top - 00:35:45 up 1 day, 14:45, 2 users, load average: 2.45, 2.40, 2.48
Tasks: 158 total, 3 running, 154 sleeping, 0 stopped, 1 zombie
Cpu(s): 1.0% us, 1.6% sy, 97.4% ni, 0.0% id, 0.0% wa, 0.
On Sat, 2004-10-02 at 17:01 -0400, Asif Iqbal wrote:
> I just upgraded my SA from 2.63 to 3.0. I did the sa-learn --sync after
> the upgrade and the restarted spamd. Now I am seeing this error in the
> log
>
> @4000415f15ec35d6286c Cannot open bayes databases
> /etc/mail/spamassassin/bayes_*
Asif Iqbal wrote:
> I just upgraded my SA from 2.63 to 3.0. I did the sa-learn --sync after
> the upgrade and the restarted spamd. Now I am seeing this error in the
> log
>
> @4000415f15ec35d6286c Cannot open bayes databases
> /etc/mail/spamassassin/bayes_* R/O: tie failed: Permission denied
Hi All
I just upgraded my SA from 2.63 to 3.0. I did the sa-learn --sync after
the upgrade and the restarted spamd. Now I am seeing this error in the
log
@4000415f15ec35d6286c Cannot open bayes databases
/etc/mail/spamassassin/bayes_* R/O: tie failed: Permission denied
@4000415f15f025579
I found 3.0 pushing my machine into swapping as well this afternoon -- a
first for me. I stopped and restarted my smtp server and spamd, and it's
back to normal for now.
I'm beginning to think I might be better off running spamassassin in
unique processes instead of as a daemon. The load time wa
Hence my comments on the OT thread earlier today about the BigEvil
author going mad one day... :)
> -Original Message-
> From: snowjack [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Friday, October 01, 2004 4:20 PM
> To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
> Subject: Re: SA 3.0 is e
Loren Wilton wrote:
80M doesn't strike me as unusual for spamd if you have any of the addon
rulesets.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]@#&sputter...! Yes, that is too unusual unless you're using
ALL the addon rulesets, including BigEvil, which, I hear, eats pets and
small children when nobody's looking, and sho
> Just a little update, this is what's going on over the server:
>
> 11:59am up 16:12, 1 user, load average: 10,51, 5,30, 2,47
> 151 processes: 144 sleeping, 6 running, 1 zombie, 0 stopped
> CPU states: 6,5% user, 2,1% system, 0,0% nice, 91,3% idle
> Mem: 449484K av, 76K used,5008
BigEvil.cf - it's one of the add-on rulesets available on the net, and one
that is notoriously huge, and thus a heavy consumer of memory. It's also
one Chris Santerre built, so jdow was giving Chris a bit of a ribbing there.
In any event, if you're using any add-on .cf files in
/etc/mail/spama
BigEvil what?
On Fri, 1 Oct 2004 13:21:47 -0700, jdow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> BigEvil.
> {^_-}
>
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Chris Santerre" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> > Something is seriously wrong with your setup! Move all cf files except
> > local.cf out of the
> > /etc/mail
BigEvil.
{^_-}
- Original Message -
From: "Chris Santerre" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Something is seriously wrong with your setup! Move all cf files except
> local.cf out of the
> /etc/mail/spamassassin dir and restart spamd. What does it read then?
>
> There is no way spamd should be that l
At 12:23 PM 10/1/2004, Luis Hernán Otegui wrote:
Additionally, I have to add that I still have one warning when I run
spamassassin --lint, and it seems to come from the standard ruleset:
warning: description for EXCUSE_ES_03 is over 50 chars
Ick. Bad form for a final release..
25_body_tests_es.cf:l
Luis Hernán Otegui said:
> ok, the virus warning issues have been solved, but NOT the fact that I
> have 22 copies of spamd running at the same time, even when I´ve
> limited the number of max children of Sendmail to 20, and each copy of
> spamd weights 21 MB! How can I limit the amount of memory
> --Chris
>
>
>
> >-Original Message-
> >From: Luis Hernán Otegui [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >Sent: Friday, October 01, 2004 11:52 AM
> >To: Chris Santerre
> >Cc: Matt Kettler; users@spamassassin.apache.org
> >Subject: Re: SA 3.0 is e
er 01, 2004 11:52 AM
>To: Chris Santerre
>Cc: Matt Kettler; users@spamassassin.apache.org
>Subject: Re: SA 3.0 is eating up all my memory!!!
>
>
>ok, all I had in the /etc/mail/spamassassin dir was my local.cf and
>the init.pre. I've cleaned the local.cf according to th
>
> There is no way spamd should be that large!!
>
> --Chris
>
>
>
> >-Original Message-
> >From: Luis Hernán Otegui [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >Sent: Friday, October 01, 2004 11:00 AM
> >To: Matt Kettler
> >Cc: users@spamassassin.apache.o
TECTED]
>Sent: Friday, October 01, 2004 11:00 AM
>To: Matt Kettler
>Cc: users@spamassassin.apache.org
>Subject: Re: SA 3.0 is eating up all my memory!!!
>
>
>Just a little update, this is what's going on over the server:
>
> 11:59am up 16:12, 1 user, load average:
Just a little update, this is what's going on over the server:
11:59am up 16:12, 1 user, load average: 10,51, 5,30, 2,47
151 processes: 144 sleeping, 6 running, 1 zombie, 0 stopped
CPU states: 6,5% user, 2,1% system, 0,0% nice, 91,3% idle
Mem: 449484K av, 76K used,5008K free,
ok, the virus warning issues have been solved, but NOT the fact that I
have 22 copies of spamd running at the same time, even when I´ve
limited the number of max children of Sendmail to 20, and each copy of
spamd weights 21 MB! How can I limit the amount of memory spamd is
chewing?
On Thu, 30 Sep
Jeff Chan wrote on Sun, 26 Sep 2004 17:03:34 -0700:
> Stop using BigEvil if you're using SA 3 with network tests.
>
I'd remove "with network tests" from that statement. We don't do any of
the "traditional" network tests (I let it do by sendmail), but we enabled
the URIDNSBL plugin. You can stil
At 07:29 PM 9/30/2004, Luis Hernán Otegui wrote:
warning: rule 'VIRUS_WARNING_MYDOOM_BNCE' is over 22 chars
lint: 51 issues detected. please rerun with debug enabled for more
information.
I have an antivirus running as a milter, how do I disable the virus
tests in SA, and also, why do I have thi
al.cf
file, but I'm still getting this:
warning: description for VIRUS_WARNING251 is over 50 chars
etc.
You've got a third-party ruleset installed that isn't compatible with SA
3.0.
Look in /etc/mail/spamassassin (or wherever your config files are) for
the file and either
handle 20 mail requests at the same time! The setup looks
like this:
-Redhat 7.3 with XFS kernel, XFS version 1.3.1.
-Sendmail 8.12.7 compiled from source, with libmilter enabled.
-HBEDV AntiVir Milter AvMilter-1.0.1.
-Spamass-Milter 0.2.0, patched to work correctly with SA 3.0.
-SpamAssassin 3.0, com
On 30 Sep 2004 at 9:00, Chip Paswater wrote:
> Does a human review the scores generated by the statistics engine?
>
> Doesn't it make sense to have more of a bell curve on the 2nd set of bayes
> scores?
>
> If not, why not?
>
> The teeth seem seem to be taken out of BAYES_99 with it's low 1.9 s
> > Hey guys,
> >
> > I was looking at the Bayes scores in 3.0 and had a couple of questions:
> [...]
>
>
> ... the FAQ ... read the FAQ ...
>
Great Bob, the FAQ says how the scores are generated, I surmised that.
But these questions aren't in the FAQ:
Does a human review the scores genera
On Thu, 30 Sep 2004 08:34:28 -0700 Chip Paswater <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hey guys,
>
> I was looking at the Bayes scores in 3.0 and had a couple of questions:
[...]
... the FAQ ... read the FAQ ...
-- Bob
Hey guys,
I was looking at the Bayes scores in 3.0 and had a couple of questions:
score BAYES_00 0 0 -1.665 -2.599
score BAYES_05 0 0 -0.925 -0.413
score BAYES_20 0 0 -0.730 -1.951
score BAYES_40 0 0 -0.276 -1.096
score BAYES_50 0 0 1.567 0.001
score BAYES_60 0 0 3.515 0.372
score BAYE
-- Forwarded Message ---
From: Jeff Chan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "David Brodbeck" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wed, 29 Sep 2004 08:07:05 -0700
Subject: Re: SA 3.0 and Bigevil
On Wednesday, September 29, 2004, 7:42:04 AM, David Brodbeck wrote:
> On Wed, 2
>-Original Message-
>From: Jeff Chan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sent: Wednesday, September 29, 2004 10:31 AM
>To: SpamAssassin Users
>Subject: Re: SA 3.0 and Bigevil
>
>
>On Wednesday, September 29, 2004, 6:46:00 AM, Chuck Campbell wrote:
>> On Sun, Sep 26,
On Wednesday, September 29, 2004, 6:46:00 AM, Chuck Campbell wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 26, 2004 at 05:03:34PM -0700, Jeff Chan wrote:
>>
>> Stop using BigEvil if you're using SA 3 with network tests.
>>
> More efficiently? What if you are on a slow network connection? Should
> you use the network t
On Sun, Sep 26, 2004 at 05:03:34PM -0700, Jeff Chan wrote:
>
> Stop using BigEvil if you're using SA 3 with network tests.
>
More efficiently? What if you are on a slow network connection? Should
you use the network tests?
-chuck
gt; From: Erik Wickstrom [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Monday, September 27, 2004 8:49 PM
> To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
> Subject: Strange Errors from SA 3.0
>
> Hi all,
>
> I keep getting strange errors like this from spamassassin:
>
> sa-learn --dump magic
&
ect: header to
> the message if one was not there. SA 3.0 does not seem to be doing so.
This is not a bug -- if you have no Subject header, SA can't rewrite it, it
doesn't exist.
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3816 currently is tracking
the enhancement request.
--
tried it with 2.63 and it adds a Subject: header to
the message if one was not there. SA 3.0 does not seem to be doing so.
Can someone else running SA on win32 confirm this and if anyone knows of a
fix I would greatly appreciate it.
Thanks.
Slava MadritGlobal Network ManagerS
as errors at the end of the --lint -D..
So, I went through each cf file and made sure my descriptions were < 50
characters long..
-Original Message-
From: Erik Wickstrom [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, September 27, 2004 8:49 PM
To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: St
On Tue, Sep 28, 2004 at 12:32:14AM -0500, Michael Parker wrote:
> > Sometimes it is db version 0 instead of 2.
>
> Yes, you read UPGRADE right?
BTW: even if the upgrade went correctly, this could also be
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3563
--
Randomly Generated Tagline:
"Choo
Hi.
I am running RH 7.3, MS 4.33.3, Perl 5.6.1 with ClamAV (Mail::ClamAV v
0.11) on a P4 with 512MB RAM.
While installing SA3.0 the other day, I *think* I had a problem with
URIDNSBL.
I was able to fix one set of problems by putting the following in my
pre.init file:
loadpluginMail::SpamAssa
On Mon, Sep 27, 2004 at 05:48:46PM -0700, Erik Wickstrom wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I keep getting strange errors like this from spamassassin:
>
> sa-learn --dump magic
> bayes db version 2 is not able to be used, aborting! at
> /usr/lob/perl5/site_perl/5.8.1/Mail/SpamAssassin/BayesStore/DBM.pm
> line
Hi all,
I keep getting strange errors like this from spamassassin:
sa-learn --dump magic
bayes db version 2 is not able to be used, aborting! at
/usr/lob/perl5/site_perl/5.8.1/Mail/SpamAssassin/BayesStore/DBM.pm
line 160.
ERROR: Bayes dump returned an error, please re-run with -D for more informa
1 - 100 of 156 matches
Mail list logo
