Mark Martinec wrote:
> The updated patch is now attached to
> https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=3364
> (replaces my previous two).
>
> In addition to previous tests, it now also resets corrupted AWL
> record when it sees one.
>
>> I don't know if it's an option but i could
Mark Martinec schreef:
First, UML is a virtual machine infrastructure.
See http://user-mode-linux.sourceforge.net/
Now you are talking!
See:
http://fixunix.com/openssl/518688-re-uml-devel-dev-random-problems-fp-regis
ters-corruption.html
Seems like it was fixed in February 2008:
UML - Fix
> > First, UML is a virtual machine infrastructure.
> > See http://user-mode-linux.sourceforge.net/
>
> Now you are talking!
>
> See:
> http://fixunix.com/openssl/518688-re-uml-devel-dev-random-problems-fp-regis
>ters-corruption.html
Seems like it was fixed in February 2008:
UML - Fix FP regist
Benedict,
> > Please don't delete your AWL. I'll provide a patch which will reset a
> > bad entry when it encounters one, so your db will be a good testground.
>
> I already deleted it but i had a backup so the original is already
> restored.
The updated patch is now attached to
https://issues.
Benedict,
> spamd[1321]: plugin: eval failed:
> Sort subroutine didn't return a numeric value
> at /usr/share/perl5/Mail/SpamAssassin/AsyncLoop.pm line 278.
Again a NaN out of nowhere, this time in timing data.
> First, UML is a virtual machine infrastructure.
> See http://user-mode-linux.source
Mark Martinec wrote:
> Benedict,
>
>> This again suggests that something is broken with my AWL. I think i'd
>> better delete it.
>> As it seems now, the only thing strange left is the AWL & related NaN.
>>
>
> Please don't delete your AWL. I'll provide a patch which will reset a
> bad entry
Benedict,
> This again suggests that something is broken with my AWL. I think i'd
> better delete it.
> As it seems now, the only thing strange left is the AWL & related NaN.
Please don't delete your AWL. I'll provide a patch which will reset a
bad entry when it encounters one, so your db will b
On Tue, 2008-10-14 at 16:19 +0200, Benedict Verheyen wrote:
> Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
> > On Tue, 2008-10-14 at 10:04 +0200, Benedict Verheyen wrote:
> >
> >> i have tested with another spam message that has a combined score of
> >> 22.5 and it's not flagged as spam.
> >> The full debug log
Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
> On Tue, 2008-10-14 at 10:04 +0200, Benedict Verheyen wrote:
>
>> i have tested with another spam message that has a combined score of
>> 22.5 and it's not flagged as spam.
>> The full debug log is here:
>> http://www.heimdallit.be/download/spam_debug_1.txt
>>
On Tue, 2008-10-14 at 16:00 +0200, Benedict Verheyen wrote:
> Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
> > This might be relevant WRT to bug 3364 [2], it definitely matches the
> > summary. Can you still reproduce these NaN scores, if you comment out
> > the above options?
> As for reproducing, see last part o
On Tue, 2008-10-14 at 10:04 +0200, Benedict Verheyen wrote:
> i have tested with another spam message that has a combined score of
> 22.5 and it's not flagged as spam.
> The full debug log is here:
> http://www.heimdallit.be/download/spam_debug_1.txt
Hmm, does that say that a bunch of major R
Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
>> as i said, to my knowledge, i'm not using any custom headers and i
>> asked how i could know for sure as it's not clear to me how to check
>
> Ah, sorry, kind of forgot about that. Well, posting your cf files is one
> option. ;) Another one is to read the configurat
On Tue, 2008-10-14 at 09:03 +0200, Benedict Verheyen wrote:
> Karsten Bräckelmann schreef:
> > Benedict, since I asked about custom headers before, it might be a good
> > idea to carefully check the config and answer my previous question.
> > Since you're not using custom rules, but change scores,
Mark Martinec schreef:
Benedict,
Thing is, what is causing the nan?
My guess is that a NaN somehow got into your AWL database.
I have reopened bug 3364, and attached a richer patch:
"Deal with NaN in AutoWhitelist and PerMsgStatus"
which includes my previous patch and also instrume
Benedict Verheyen wrote:
Some more interesting stuff from /var/log/syslog:
Oct 14 09:15:08 loki spamd[1274]: auto-whitelist: attempt to add a nan
to AWL entry ignored
177 Oct 14 09:15:08 loki spamd[1274]: !! rules: score 'nan' for rule
'AWL' in 'AWL: ' 'From: address is in the auto white-lis
Mark Martinec wrote:
> Guenther, Benedict,
>
>>> My guess is that a NaN somehow got into your AWL database.
>> Things are much more complicated, or rather weird, than that.
>>
>> According to Benedict's reports and pasted snippets, he got an NaN score
>> for at least 3 rules: FROM_ILLEGAL_CHARS, A
Karsten Bräckelmann schreef:
> Benedict, since I asked about custom headers before, it might be a good
> idea to carefully check the config and answer my previous question.
> Since you're not using custom rules, but change scores, you likely
> copied (read: inherited) that part from your previous c
Guenther, Benedict,
> > My guess is that a NaN somehow got into your AWL database.
>
> Things are much more complicated, or rather weird, than that.
>
> According to Benedict's reports and pasted snippets, he got an NaN score
> for at least 3 rules: FROM_ILLEGAL_CHARS, AWL, MSOE_MID_WRONG_CASE
Yo
On Mon, 2008-10-13 at 17:39 +0200, Mark Martinec wrote:
> > Thing is, what is causing the nan?
>
> My guess is that a NaN somehow got into your AWL database.
Things are much more complicated, or rather weird, than that.
According to Benedict's reports and pasted snippets, he got an NaN score
fo
Benedict,
> Thing is, what is causing the nan?
My guess is that a NaN somehow got into your AWL database.
I have reopened bug 3364, and attached a richer patch:
"Deal with NaN in AutoWhitelist and PerMsgStatus"
which includes my previous patch and also instruments
AutoWhitelist module to check
Benedict Verheyen wrote:
>
> I got a message that again scored a nan for MSOE_MID_WRONG_CASE
> The mail is available here:
> http://paste-it.net/public/r3df8b2/
>
> Weird thing is that the lines i added to PerMsgStatus.pm weren't showing up.
>
> Regards,
> Benedict
My bad, i reinstalled
Benedict Verheyen wrote:
> Hi,
>
> thanks Mark and Guenther.
>
> I patched the score part as indicated in Mark's mail and when i run
> spamassassin in
> debug mode, i do see a message popping up with results to a NaN score:
> [6443] warn: rules: score 'nan' for rule 'AWL' in 'AWL: '
>
Guenther wrote:
>> Do you use customized headers? (Sorry, don't have the OP, but IIRC I
>> spotted some.) What are the results of the snippets in comment 4, and
>> what about comment 11?
>>
>
> A question is for Benedict I suppose.
>
>
>> Puzzling, how he gets NaN in the first place. Bened
Guenther wrote:
> Do you use customized headers? (Sorry, don't have the OP, but IIRC I
> spotted some.) What are the results of the snippets in comment 4, and
> what about comment 11?
A question is for Benedict I suppose.
> Puzzling, how he gets NaN in the first place. Benedict, did you lint
> y
On Fri, 2008-10-10 at 16:45 +0200, Mark Martinec wrote:
> Benedict,
>
> > I found bug # 3364 in the buglist and according to this it seems like a
> > Debian issue. It doesn't seem to occur on other systems or at least it's
> > not reproducable.
Do you use customized headers? (Sorry, don't have th
Benedict,
> I found bug # 3364 in the buglist and according to this it seems like a
> Debian issue. It doesn't seem to occur on other systems or at least it's
> not reproducable.
>
> The uri bl black is scored as nan again.
> It's really annoying as this is what probably is causing the score not
>
Benedict Verheyen wrote:
> Benedict Verheyen wrote:
>
>
> I want to reply to my previous message with some more info but i'm not
> able to do so, my messages keep getting flagged as spam.
> Very annoying, first spamassassin doesn't work like it should here and i
> can't even ask for help now :)
>
Benedict Verheyen wrote:
> Benedict Verheyen wrote:
>
>
> I want to reply to my previous message with some more info but i'm not
> able to do so, my messages keep getting flagged as spam.
> Very annoying, first spamassassin doesn't work like it should here and i
> can't even ask for help now :)
>
Benedict Verheyen wrote:
I want to reply to my previous message with some more info but i'm not
able to do so, my messages keep getting flagged as spam.
Very annoying, first spamassassin doesn't work like it should here and i
can't even ask for help now :)
Who do i contact to solve the issue of m
Hi,
i'm using Debian stable and spamassassin v3.2.3.
Recently i noticed a few spam mails getting through although the
combined scores should be high enough.
The email is however flagged as not being spam, the score is set to 3.9 but
should actually be way higher.
I also encountered something simil
30 matches
Mail list logo
