At 12:00 PM +0200 07/29/2013, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
You're best bet is to just train what you have as spam, to counter the
Sure, I was planning to do that. The reason I
wanted to --forget it was to make sure that I
wasn't learning it twice (once as ham, once as
spam).
You do not have to --forget a mis-trained message anyway, unless simply
reverting the training is what you want. If you want to correct the
auto-learn and train as --spam, SA will automatically imply the forget
step, if the message has been seen (trained) before. (Of course, that
Right, but see above -- I knew that SA kept a
list of messages it had learned but that the MUA
can cause changes in the message (e.g. in some
MIME header) that would cause the Bayes hash to
be different, and thus the message would be
considered "new." In that case, it would be
learned twice, instead of forgotten and
re-learned.
SA always needs a full, raw message, including all headers, alternative
parts, and attachments if any. And in particular regarding the sa-learn
message ID, almost every bit counts.
Yes, in this case the message was plain-text, no
attachment, no MIME, etc. I used the "view raw
source" option in the MUA and pasted that text
into a separate file, then attempted to --forget
it. Obviously, it didn't work. Normally I take
the entire Junk mailbox and use --mbox on it
(although even that doesn't always work), but
this time I wanted to process this individual
message.
I suppose it's possible there is some 8-bit UTF
character in there that's not displaying but that
isn't copying and pasting... in which case using
the full mbox might be what I need. But, I don't
think that this is the case... I think the
message literally is 7-bit plain-text and should
therefore be easy to copy/paste using raw source,
except for whatever my MUA did to it...
Thanks.
--- Amir
