Thanks for such a quick reply. So upgrading would really be helpful in terms of performance if nothing else. Ok, I'll give it a thought. Maybe I'll find a Debian package with the latest version. Should be possible.
I installed SpamAssassin today for the first time and "The Ultimate Online Pharmaceutical" (seems like a LOT of people get this one in particular) came through undetected. I had to add a manual rule to take care of it. Could that have happened because I have an older version of SA? If so, any options besides upgrading? Thanks! On Mon, Apr 10, 2006 at 08:40:03PM -0400, Matt Kettler wrote: > Sergei Gerasenko wrote: > > Hello everybody, > > > > Got a potentially previously answered question. I have spamassassin > > 3.0.2-3, which is the current release with Debian. I wouldn't like to > > deviate from the official package and so I'm wondering if it's > > absolutely necessary to upgrade. I diffed the rules, they seem to be the > > same. > > > > That's actually why I'm looking into this. I'll need to update the rules > > periodically and sa-update is not in 3.0.2. Is there a repository of the > > standard rules somewhere? I couldn't find it no matter how hard I > > looked. > There are no standard rule updates that will work with the SA 3.0.x > codebase. > > The whole idea behind SA 0.1 through 3.0.5 was that if you needed new > rules, you upgraded your SA version. Rule updates were previously very > slow, due to the expensive mass-check process. New releases of SA code > came out much faster than new rules, thus there was no point in > separating the two. (rule updates were typically only made once or twice > for a given major.minor release of SA. ie: 2.60 and 2.64 had rule > updates, 2.61-63 did not.) > > With 3.1.1 and higher, the SA devs are trying out an approach of adding > on rules and making updates to an already released version. However, > this is a completely new concept, and thus only supported on the > completely new version. >
