On Monday 12 March 2007 14:32, LuKreme wrote: > On 12-Mar-2007, at 03:26, Magnus Holmgren wrote: > > Yes; see the Mail::SpamAssassin::Conf(3pm) manpage, section > > "Template tags". > > Thanks, but out of curiosity what did the "(3pm)" mean?
It's a more specific man section than just (3), meaning "libraries (Perl
modules)". But not all installations create man pages from the embedded pod
documentation, so perldoc probably is a safer bet.
> I found the section with perldoc Mail::SpamAssassin::Conf
>
> I also saw this:
> Note that you should only use the _REQD_ and _SCORE_ tags
> when rewriting the Subject header if "report_safe" is 0.
> Otherwise,
> you may not be able to remove the SpamAssassin markup via
> the nor-
> mal methods. More information about tags is explained
> below in the
> TEMPLATE TAGS section.
>
> So I should not be subject tagging at all?
>
> Most my users use the subject tagging to sort (they're not
> sophisticated enough to filter on the X-Spam-Status, for example) but
> I've been running with report_safe 1 since that option was introduced
> back in 2.mumble. How serious is this warning?
I haven't tested what happens, and I've looked at the code but haven't been
able to figure out why this would be so. I thought report_safe preserved the
original spam unmodified, with any rewriting taking place in the header copy
in the encapsulating message. Maybe the documentation is backwards, but the
current code preserves the originals of the rewritten headers as
X-Spam-Prev-<name>. Maybe the documentation is obsolete. Could please
somebody knowing more explain?
--
Magnus Holmgren [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(No Cc of list mail needed, thanks)
pgpKHy6rsXbfW.pgp
Description: PGP signature
