Re: Several problems with SA 3.1

2006-02-17 Thread Frank Bures
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Thu, 16 Feb 2006 10:22:30 +0100 (CET), Eduardo Gimeno wrote: >Thanks for the reply. I found the sample .procmailrc file at some >documentation page... I would expect it beign case sensitive to... >Well, then I leave the rule as "^X-Spam-Status: Yes

Re: Several problems with SA 3.1

2006-02-16 Thread Chris Purves
Eduardo Gimeno wrote: Thanks for the reply. I found the sample .procmailrc file at some documentation page... I would expect it beign case sensitive to... Well, then I leave the rule as "^X-Spam-Status: Yes". Anyhow this way it is working. I wonder why this changed from one day to other... What

Re: Several problems with SA 3.1

2006-02-16 Thread Chris Purves
Eduardo Gimeno wrote: 2.-SA was classifying mail properly, attending to "^X-Spam-Status: .*Yes", into spam and ham folders. Since yesterday, all legitimate (ham) mail is going directly to SPAM folder, without any mark. What has changed??? I noticed the headers were including the tag: X-Spam-Sta

Re: Several problems with SA 3.1

2006-02-16 Thread Eduardo Gimeno
Thanks for the reply. I found the sample .procmailrc file at some documentation page... I would expect it beign case sensitive to... Well, then I leave the rule as "^X-Spam-Status: Yes". Anyhow this way it is working. I wonder why this changed from one day to other... What about the EXITCODE? Is 6

Several problems with SA 3.1

2006-02-16 Thread Eduardo Gimeno
Hello. I have installed SA 3.1 some weeks ago, and I have had time enough to test it, and I noticed the following problems: 1.-A lot of mails are retained in the mailq. They appear as "deferred" and stay blocked there for days. Their recipients are spammer whose address is unreal. My user .procma