----- Original Message -----
From: "Matt Kettler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "John Fleming" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <users@spamassassin.apache.org>
Sent: Tuesday, June 14, 2005 2:48 PM
Subject: Re: Bayes?
John Fleming wrote:
Not sure what I'm doing wrong, but noone has responded to my question -
If Bayes is working properly, am I supposed to have a Bayes_ entry in the
X-Spam_Status header info for every email?
In 3.x, I think you should, but I can't speak with any authority here.
In 2.6x, definitely not. Anything which is at the 50/50 mark won't show
any
bayes hits at all for 2.6x users.
I think that's the way it used to be - Bayes_00 - Bayes_99 etc. Lately
it seems that only the spam emails
have those entries.
Hmm, that's a little odd. You might try hand running some of the messages
through spamassassin -D and see if the debug gives you any clues.
Here's my headers - SA 3.0.3 on Debian
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.3 (2005-04-27) on Luke.wa9als.com
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=5.0 tests=HTML_90_100,HTML_MESSAGE
autolearn=no version=3.0.3
Perl is 5.8.4 on Debian Stable (Sarge)
spamassassin --lint is OK; Bayes is turned on in local.cf and no recent
changes to that file.
A week or so ago I ran spamassassin -D, and the interesting thing I saw was
that the "Bayes test" (I don't know the specifics of this) worked fine and
came up with a percentage score.
All my caught spam has Bayes headers with high scores, but none of the ham
has any Bayes entries.
Other thoughts? Tnx - John
