Hello, thank you all for your replies.
On Sat, Nov 06, 2010 at 08:43:15PM +0100, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote: > On Sat, 2010-11-06 at 16:17 +0100, Oliver Block wrote: > > I am experiencing the same problem. I was calling sa-learn as follows: > > Since you didn't include the actual output, I assume by "experiencing > the same" you also mean the same sa-learn result? Like this. > > Learned from 0 message(s) (4 message(s) examined). Yes, expect the fact that in my case it says "Learned tokens from 0 message(s) (1 message(s) examined)", since I am only passing one message to sa-learn each time. > Point being, you are missing the --mbox option in your command, which is > used in the referenced previous posts. You'd need that, if it actually > is mbox format with one or more messages. I thought the --mbox option is needed when the path to the mbox is given as a command line argument. In my case the mail to learn is passed to sa-learn via STDIN (or at least this is what I am aiming). It seems that when I remove the "&" sa-learn received correctly the mail via STDIN from mutt. But with the & it seems that it does not receive anything (see the post of RW). By the way, if I call sa-learn from the command line (with the "&") as described, it works without problems. > > <pipe-message> sa-learn --spam --no-sync -D bayes >> ~/.sa-learn.log 2>&1 & > > > > Removing the "&" at the end of the sa-learn call, [...] > > solved the problem for me. Then sa-learn correctly learns the spam mails. > > One thing sticking out, common between you and the old post, is the > usage of -D debugging and redirecting STDERR. In the referenced post, > the user mentions that piping to 'less' shows the headers. Which sure > does not require redirecting STDERR. > > So, while I am not sure why this would be, I guess the issue is somehow > related to using both, 2>&1 as well as & nohup. > > If you drop the -D and STDERR redirection, but keep the & nohup, does it > work for you? I still get the message "Learned tokens from 0 message(s) (1 message(s) examined)". I am not sure that is the reason for it (debug output being deactivated), but I guess the reason it the same (no input via STDIN to sa-learn). > As RW just showed (nice one!), with the above command, sa-learn somehow > gets fed empty messages... I think this is in fact the problem. Maybe it is a mutt-related problem concerning the "&". Best, Oliver
