>Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2002 22:36:51 -0500
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: Re: [SAtalk] Continuing to help the ignorant
>From: Greg Ward <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> > Some of it was identifiable text, and just too tempting. OK, it's
> > deleted. But what does one do when SA comes to a wrong conclusion? When
> > it adds the sender of a piece of junk that it didn't catch to the
> > auto-whitelist, there must be some way to remove it. Otherwise, it
> > "thinks" it's right, and then just about guarantees that further junk
> > mailings will get through.
>
>Which version of SA are you using? Auto-whitelisting was waaaay too
>simplistic in 2.0, and most people just disabled it for exactly the
>reason you cite. Craig came up with a clever-sounding algorithm for
>2.1, but I don't have much experience of it yet myself.
>
>Can anyone give real-world results for AWL in SA 2.1 yet?
>
> > I did change a few in user_prefs, but have seen no indication they are
> > being used. Since I mostly changed the negative scores for some positive
> > attributes, I don't get to see detail on them, just the total score when a
> > message gets through. I'll change some of the scores for phrases that
> > definitely get caught, just to assure myself that I've got some control.
>
>Pipe your message through "spamassassin -t" to see a full report
>regardless of how spammy it is.
My user_prefs settings are definitely not being considered.
>If you're using spamc/spamd (and you should be, for efficiency
>reasons!), note that spamd doesn't always see your user_prefs file. It
>usually boils down to a permissions problem. Running "spamd -D" might
>help clarify things.
I'm damned if I know what my ISP is running, but I've just asked, so I'll
know soon. This is my .procmailrc file as it currently exists:
:0fw
| spamassassin -P
:0e
{
EXITCODE=$?
}
:0:
* ^X-Spam-Status: Yes
/home/machiya/Mail/plucked.txt
Where does "spamc" or "spamd" come into it? What do they do, and where do
(or would) they live? I'm also one of those who have some Perl troubles,
and the following may explain why. Anyone running FreeBSD is using an
older version of Perl. I quote my ISP, quoting his source:
>>This is probably why FreeBSD hasn't upgraded (from a commercial perl app
>>site):
>>
>> Perl 5.6.0 appears to be not entirely backward compatible. Perl
>> 5.005_03 has been out for a while, is reliable and good, and is
>> known to work with our software. We recommend that customers who
>> are having trouble and are using Perl 5.6.0 try using Perl 5.005_03.
Thanks for the help. I should'a kept on with the software engineering
education and maybe I'd not be so helpless. But I hated it, and so I get
into something like this in my free time. Makes no sense at all.
mh
_______________________________________________
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk
