On Thursday 19 May 2005 10:43, Ingo Reinhart wrote: > Hello! > > I am a little confused with the bayes. I have set > bayes_auto_learn_threshold_spam = 6. > > Why is the following mail not autolearn as spam? No user.prefs or else is > set.
Sorry to snip your data Ingo, but I am in the process of working out a problem of my own with spamc/spamd, and in doing so, might be able to help you. I found this link helpful to me (although it didn't quite solve my particular problem) : http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/AutolearningNotWorking "Lots of people seem to be confused by the "autolearn=no" statement in the default X-Spam-Status header. There are usually questions regarding whether or not "no" means SpamAssassin is not autolearning at all. What it actually means is that the specific message which includes the "autolearn=no" part was not autolearned, not that autolearning is disabled or somehow broken." (snip) "If a message has already been learned by SpamAssassin, then that message will not be learned again. Therefore, if you run a message through SpamAssassin to see why it was classified as spam or ham, and it has already been learned, you will always get the result "autolearn=no". (To see this more clearly, use the "-D" flag, and you will see debug output explaining that the message has already been learned.)" I'm just going to 'piggyback' my query on top of yours if that's ok. My mail server runs SpamAssassin 3.0.3 on Fedora Core 3 (2.6.11-1.14_FC3). SA was installed via Perl. I had previously installed SA using up2date but due to the problem I will mention in a minute, I decided to try the Perl install to see if anything changed. It didn't. When I had the dynamic duo of spamc/spamd running, I noticed I was getting similar outputs to Ingo, as far as 'autolearn' was concerned, but with 'autolearn=failed' coming up more often. I never got 'autolearn=ham or spam'. Switching to using the spamassassin binary on it's own, instead of spamc/spamd produced better results, with 'autolearn=ham' coming up for every ham mail I got. I am very pleased with this, but can't help wondering why the spamc/spamd combo produces 'autolearn=failed' when the spamassassin binary doesn't. To clarify what I mean, here is the section of my procmailrc on my mail server, that is relevant to SA : :0fw: spamassassin.lock | /usr/bin/spamassassin (this always seems to make SA do an 'autolearn=ham') Before, I had this in my procmailrc : :0fw: | /usr/bin/spamc (This produces 'autolearn=failed', with the occasional 'autolearn=no') From the aforementioned link, I found this explanation of the failure : "failed: means that autolearning was attempted, but couldn't complete. This happens if SpamAssassin can't gain a lock on the Bayes database files, etc." Basically, what do I do now to enable the spamc/spamd combo to get proper locking ? By the way, I did try adding the 'spamassassin.lock' entry to the second procmailrc excerpt above, but nothing changed. If it helps, this is my local.cf, in /etc/mail/spamassassin : rewrite_header Subject [SPAM] required_hits 4.8 # report_safe 1 # trusted_networks 212.17.35. lock_method flock # These addresses should never be marked as [SPAM]. whitelist_from [EMAIL PROTECTED] whitelist_from [EMAIL PROTECTED] whitelist_from [EMAIL PROTECTED] whitelist_from [EMAIL PROTECTED] The 'lock_method flock' was initially commented out. I enabled it to experiment, as I don't use NFS. Sorry for the long post. Pete.
