On Fri, Mar 5, 2010 at 16:46, Mark Martinec wrote:
> Your options are:
> - contact the maintainer of IO::Socket::INET6 and sort out the problem;
I just did and filed a bug report. Let's hope they can treat
127.0.0.1/0.0.0.0 as special cases and NOT query them against local
domain.
No one but ins
BTW: https://rt.cpan.org/Public/Bug/Display.html?id=55278
Rw wrote on Sat, 6 Mar 2010 01:04:20 +:
> There's nothing odd about that, it's common that hard to learn spam is
> identified correctly on retesting.
I'm not sure what you want to say. Do you want to say that a message tested
right
after learning may get 99, but next day it will have 50 aga
Alex wrote on Fri, 5 Mar 2010 21:55:35 -0500:
> However,
> searching through the quarantine to see how many with a similar
> pattern have been caught, I see there are a large number of emails
> with BAYES_00. Is this a sure sign of a problem with bayes?
Maybe.
> If so, can I pull the messages ou
On Fri, 5 Mar 2010 22:29:06 -0700
LuKreme wrote:
> On 5-Mar-2010, at 11:45, LuKreme wrote:
> >
> > On 04-Mar-10 21:41, James Smallacombe wrote:
> >> I tried to upgrade from SA 3.2.5 to 3.3.0 by installing the newer
> >> one from FreeBSD Ports.
> >
> > Really? I just did a update of the port tre
On Sat, 06 Mar 2010 11:31:17 +0100
Kai Schaetzl wrote:
> Rw wrote on Sat, 6 Mar 2010 01:04:20 +:
>
> > There's nothing odd about that, it's common that hard to learn spam
> > is identified correctly on retesting.
>
> I'm not sure what you want to say. Do you want to say that a message
> tes
Rw wrote on Sat, 6 Mar 2010 14:20:15 +:
> I mean that a similar spam from the same spammer that's not been
> learned will hit 50.
That depends on your definition of "similar". If it doesn't score it's
not "similar".
Anyway, as I said I interpreted his remark as doing some testing right
aft
I trigger on the X-Originating-IP header. You'll probably want to do
64.72.123 and 64.72.124 also.
Sample rule:
header TBI_HOTMAIL_IP9X-Originating-IP =~
/\[(83\.37\.86\.|189\.156\.198\.|190\.78\.95\.|189\.111\.56\.|125\.163\.120\.|115\.118\.23\.|123\.201\.175\.|64\.72\.122\.|83\.
On Sat, 06 Mar 2010 16:31:21 +0100
Kai Schaetzl wrote:
> Rw wrote on Sat, 6 Mar 2010 14:20:15 +:
>
> > I mean that a similar spam from the same spammer that's not been
> > learned will hit 50.
>
> That depends on your definition of "similar". If it doesn't score
> it's not "similar".
they
Hi,
>> If so, can I pull the messages out, unlearn them, then re-learn them
>> as spam instead?
>
> I don't think this makes sense. You don't know which messages biased your
> db in the wrong way. It's better to start over.
Bayes has such a substantial role in the messages that get tagged, I
coul
Dear All,
I want to update my SA bayes database. Is there any way to do it manually?
How to get most latest DB of it?
It is urgent for me.
Thank you and waiting for reply,
--
Kind regards,
Dhaval Soni
Red Hat Certified Architect
RHCE No: 804007900325939
Cell: +91-966 20 29 620
***
On Sun, 2010-03-07 at 00:59 +0530, Dhaval Soni wrote:
> I want to update my SA bayes database. Is there any way to do it
> manually? How to get most latest DB of it?
You don't get Bayes databases from an external source. You build it
yourself by learning from your ham and spam, for your particular
On 06-Mar-10 05:07, RW wrote:
On Fri, 5 Mar 2010 22:29:06 -0700
LuKreme wrote:
3.3.0 was available on my machine as of 19 Feb. I have no idea what
portversion's problem is/was.
portversion get its version information from the index file. You need
to do a "make fetchindex" in the ports direct
13 matches
Mail list logo
