Chris Santerre wrote:
-- Bizzaro-Chris (I know all of the real Chris's dark secrets!)
Bizarro! Bizarro! Bizarro!
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
> >
> > meta TOO_MANY_URIBLS URIBL_OB_SURBL && URIBL_JP_SURBL
> ..^ Modifier missing?
Err...uhh...what the heck was I thinking? :) Disregard the above. I'm
pouring myself another cup of coffee.
>
> > describe TOO_MANY_URIBLS On too many URIBLs
> > score TOO MANY_URIBLS2
Chris Santerre wrote:
>>1. I tried the following rule on some test emails:
>>
>>meta TOO_MANY_URIBLS URIBL_OB_SURBL && URIBL_JP_SURBL
>
> ..^ Modifier missing?
Modifier? What's a modifier?
While it might be more common to see someone using parentheses, AFAIK they
aren't re
> -Original Message-
> From: Anthony McCarthy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Monday, August 22, 2005 6:40 PM
> To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
> Subject: question on meta rules
>
>
> Is there something special about meta rules?
> Could someone explain
On Mon, Aug 22, 2005 at 03:39:40PM -0700, Anthony McCarthy wrote:
> meta TOO_MANY_URIBLS URIBL_OB_SURBL && URIBL_JP_SURBL
> describe TOO_MANY_URIBLS On too many URIBLs
> score TOO MANY_URIBLS2 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3
^ ^-- not the same as the rulename above
Is there something special about meta rules?
Could someone explain what appear to be anomolies between the assigned
score and the actual score?
1. I tried the following rule on some test emails:
meta TOO_MANY_URIBLS URIBL_OB_SURBL && URIBL_JP_SURBL
describe TOO_MANY_URIBLS On too many URIBLs
