On Mon, 2009-05-04 at 17:18 -0400, Theo Van Dinter wrote:
> 2009/5/4 Karsten Bräckelmann <guent...@rudersport.de>:
> >> via https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=2865. In
> >
> > No commit pointer. I'm lazy, Theo, any hints to the actual commit so I
> > don't have to dig? :)
>
> Sure. I found it by a) looking at the code and validating my
> understanding, and b) looking at svn log and finding:
> That said, the diff doesn't really show much, and "svn blame" actually
> points at r149224 instead:
Looked at the code, too. Found the (current) code to validate the claim.
> so then you have to find the original module. I thought it was
> Bayes.pm, but it's actually PerMsgStatus.pm, which makes sense when I
> think about it some more ... However, finding when the code got
> added was hard -- I ended up doing a binary search w/ "svn cat" and
> ended up here, which was the first mention of learner_said_ham_points:
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> r6746 | duncf | 2004-02-18 20:24:48 -0500 (Wed, 18 Feb 2004) | 1 line
Right, first occurrence, but it just got renamed. That constraint did
exist before. From svn diff -c 6746
- if ($self->{learned_hits} > $learner_said_spam_hits) {
+ if ($self->{learned_points} > $learner_said_spam_points) {
So it isn't bug 2865, which got fixed over a year later than that old
occurrence of the code in question. Anyway, you're right that RW's claim
is correct, as I just admitted in my previous post. :)
Thanks for digging through svn anyway. ;)
guenther
--
char *t="\10pse\0r\0dtu...@ghno\x4e\xc8\x79\xf4\xab\x51\x8a\x10\xf4\xf4\xc4";
main(){ char h,m=h=*t++,*x=t+2*h,c,i,l=*x,s=0; for (i=0;i<l;i++){ i%8? c<<=1:
(c=*++x); c&128 && (s+=h); if (!(h>>=1)||!t[s+h]){ putchar(t[s]);h=m;s=0; }}}
