On Friday, September 8, 2006 at 3:40:06 PM, Bowie confabulated: > Floyd wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I am new to SpamAssassin, I have been testing it for about 3 to 4 >> weeks now and I have categorized about >> 4000 ham and about 1000 spam, and I still get the same spam after a >> few days. >> What I am trying to figure out is about sa-learn. >> When I look at the logs and it classifies an incoming mail that is >> spam it gives it a score of 2.8 out of 6 and therefore it classifies >> as ham. >> Log file: >> >> PreFile: C:\ESA\NEW\msg060907173314_A5169.in.eml PostFile: >> C:\ESA\NEW\msg060907173314_A5169.out.eml >> 09-07-2006 05:33:14 : SpamAssassin: C:\PERL\BIN\SPAMASSASSIN.BAT < >> "C:\ESA\NEW\msg060907173314_A5169.in.eml" > >> "C:\ESA\NEW\msg060907173314_A5169.out.eml" >> >> >> But when i run spamassassin -t < c:\esa\ham\message in question it >> gives me a score of 10.6, >> >> Now why is the previous score different from the manual score. They >> both are running spamassassin from c:\perl\bin >> >> The only difference is the logs show c:\perl\bin\spamassassin.bat >> and i use c:\perl\bin\spamassassin -t >> >> Is there a difference beteen the two....I don't think so
> c:\perl\bin\spamassassin is a Perl program > c:\perl\bin\spamassassin.bat is a DOS batch file > Take a look at the .bat file and see what options it uses when it > calls spamassassin. Then do your tests with the same options and see > what you get. By default, when something is ran on the command line without an extension, Windows assumes to add the appropriate extension before determining the proper application to use. Therefore, 'spamassassin' on the command line ultimately runs 'spamassassin.bat'. The other 'spamassassin' without the extension would never get ran unless you supply the Perl interpreter with the command. I.e. 'perl spamassassin' or 'c:\perl\bin\perl.exe c:\perl\bin\spamassassin'. The same would hold true for 'sa-learn' as would 'sa-update'. -- "This message was sent using 100% recycled electrons."
