Jim Maul wrote: > Don Levey wrote: >> Don Levey wrote: >> >>> Messages coming in and autoscanned via spamass-milter/spamd all fail >>> autolearn. To pick one example from this list (full headers >>> available if it will help): >>> >>> >>> X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 >>> autolearn=failed version=3.0.4 >>> X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.4 (2005-06-05) on >>> davinci.the-leveys.us Status: O >>> X-UID: 7374 >>> Content-Length: 570 >>> X-Keywords: >>> >> ... >> >> As a followup: I've noticed that at least *some* messages are coming >> in with "autolearn=no". I've not yet found the difference. -Don >> >> >> > > Failed means it didnt work for some reason. No means it simply didnt > even try to autolearn (score wasnt high enough, spam/ham threshold not > reached, etc.) In short, failed points to a potential problem, > whereas no doesnt. > > -Jim
That I understood; I'm mentioning the "no" because that means the autolearn is functioning in at least some cases. The only differences I'm seeing between the failure and functioning cases are the actual spam scores. Those with "autolearn=no" seem to score at least -3.7 or higher, while the "autolearn=failed" show up as -4.8 or -4.9. -Don
