Kris Deugau writes: > Karsten Bräckelmann wrote: > > Unlike regular score lines for non-existent rules (which are kind of > > ignored), the relative score adjustment depends on the rule to be > > defined before. > > > > Given your demo rule above, > > Nominally live, actually. I've had perfectly legitimate staff email > hitting FORGED_MUA_OUTLOOK. :( (I've created a meta rule instead to > drop the score, and since then I've also added whitelist_from_rcvd rules > for all of our office firewalls as well... but if it hits us, it could > hit customer mail as well.) > > > you are distributing a custom channel. It > > will work, if you rename the channel name to come after the stock > > updates channel when sorting lexically. > > *shrug* It does; it's called zzsarules.vianet.ca. When I first > created it, I *did* run into problems simply redefining scores at fixed > values for rules in other rulesets which were, indeed, sorted *after* my > local channel originally (don't recall the details ATM; pretty sure I > posted here asking about it). Thus the "zz" prefix - but it still > doesn't accept a score *adjustment*. > > I've isolated an example into a testable "ruleset"; try: > > # sa-update --channel zzsarules.deepnet.cx --nogpg > > (Single scoreadj.cf file, with the single rule > "score FORGED_MUA_OUTLOOK (-1)") > > Note I'm running 3.2.5 on all the machines using the live ruleset, but > IIRC I first hit this problem with 3.2.4.
In this situation, I think the cleanest way to do it is to define a meta: meta FORGED_MUA_OUTLOOK_ADJUST (FORGED_MUA_OUTLOOK) score FORGED_MUA_OUTLOOK_ADJUST -1 those are not dependent on the order in which they're defined in any way. --j.
