Am 05.03.2015 um 21:34 schrieb RW:
On Thu, 05 Mar 2015 14:08:14 -0500
Kevin A. McGrail wrote:

On 3/5/2015 1:01 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
according to spamc --help "-R" and "--full" is the same
in fact in case of a ham-message only -R works as expected
--full behaves identical zu --full-spam

-r, --full-spam     Print full report for messages identified as
spam. -R, --full          Print full report for all messages.
____________________________

BROKEN: /usr/bin/spamc --full --port=10029 < sample.eml
OK:     /usr/bin/spamc R --port=10029 < sample.eml


The spamc code seems to concur -R and --full are the same option:

         { "full", no_argument, 0, 'R' }

Looking in the code, nothing jumps out as a logic issue but testing
on my command line with ham shows problems

spamc -R -d spamd.pccc.com < /tmp/1
<Incorrectly starts with the score/threshold which could just be a
documentation issue and then the report>

That's what the documentation does say IMO:

-R, --full
           ...
           See -r for details of the output format used.


  -r, --full-spam
            Just output the SpamAssassin report text to stdout, if ....
            The first line of the output is the message score and the
            threshold, in this format:

                    score/threshold

my problem is that it don't output anything while -R does and in case of spam it would - so '--full; behaves *identical* to -r instead to -R

BTW: it would be nice not have that "Content preview"

[root@mail-gw:~]$ su -c "/usr/bin/spamc --full -l -s 20000000 -d 127.0.0.1 -p 10029 < /var/lib/spamass-milter/test/6.eml" - sa-milt

results in no outout at all
_______________________________________________________

expected result

[root@mail-gw:~]$ su -c "/usr/bin/spamc -R -l -s 20000000 -d 127.0.0.1 -p 10029 < /var/lib/spamass-milter/test/6.eml" - sa-milt
2.0/5.0
Spam detection software, running on the system "mail-gw.thelounge.net",
has NOT identified this incoming email as spam.  The original
message has been attached to this so you can view it or label
similar future email.  If you have any questions, see
the administrator of that system for details.

Content preview:  [...]

Content analysis details:   (2.0 points, 5.0 required)

 pts rule name              description
---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
 2.0 BAYES_50               BODY: Bayes spam probability is 40 to 60%
                            [score: 0.5000]
_______________________________________________________

fine, that's a junk message and so it don't matter

[root@mail-gw:~]$ su -c "/usr/bin/spamc --full -l -s 20000000 -d 127.0.0.1 -p 10029 < /var/lib/spamass-milter/test/5.eml" - sa-milt
Spam detection software, running on the system "mail-gw.thelounge.net",
has identified this incoming email as possible spam.  The original
message has been attached to this so you can view it or label
similar future email.  If you have any questions, see
the administrator of that system for details.

Content preview:  [...]

Content analysis details:   (7.9 points, 5.0 required)

 pts rule name              description
---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
 7.5 BAYES_99               BODY: Bayes spam probability is 99 to 100%
                            [score: 1.0000]
 0.4 BAYES_999              BODY: Bayes spam probability is 99.9 to 100%
                            [score: 1.0000]


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Reply via email to