[Bug 3917] SpamC is reporting "failed sanity check" on some messages
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3917 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-22 15:34 --- hmm. what about character sets? is everyone using the US codepage? --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.
[Bug 3917] SpamC is reporting "failed sanity check" on some messages
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3917 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-22 14:12 --- It looks like spamd thinks everything is ok, but spamc is getting in error in the socket connection. 76 is, as you said, "remote error in protocol" which I see is defined as "The remote system returned something that was not possible during a protocol exchange". I could see how I could not reproduce it trying it once on my system. Here are some other things to try in order to narrow it down: Do you get the same results if you disable the network checks by running spamd with -L? How about running without Bayes? I'm thinking in terms of what happens if spamd is not doing anything that potemtially takes a long elapsed time. Another interesting extra piece of information would be to add timestamps to the spamd -D output. I guess you could do that by adding in the time to the warn "debug: " $msg line in sub dbg in SpamAssassin.pm. That would show if there are any long delays during the spamd processing in the cases that fail. --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.
[Bug 3771] PostgreSQL Specific Bayes Storage Module
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3771 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #2474 is|0 |1 obsolete|| --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-22 13:58 --- Created an attachment (id=2478) --> (http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/attachment.cgi?id=2478&action=view) Patch File Thanks to a hint from Stefan on IRC I added an index to the bayes_token table which helped a good bit. So, I restored the code and added the index with this patch. --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.
Re: When did that module first become core? (fwd)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 hmm. even better, a web form ;) - --j. - --- Forwarded Message > Date:Fri, 22 Oct 2004 15:58:49 +0100 > From:Nicholas Clark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: Andy Lester <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > cc: perl5 Porters > Subject: Re: When did that module first become core? > > On Fri, Oct 22, 2004 at 08:59:34AM -0500, Andy Lester wrote: > > >>What first perl version this method is available in? perlsec should > >>give > >>techniques working across a reasonable number of older perls. at least > >>5.6.x? > > > >Scalar-List-Utils has been around for much longer, but wasn't in the > >core until 5.8.0. > > I'd like to point out the swell Module::CoreList module maintained by > Richard Clamp. It answers all your core questions: > > $ corelist Scalar::Util > Scalar::Util was first released with perl 5.007003 > > Mark Fowler made a web lookup form for it: > > http://www.twoshortplanks.com/modulecorelist/ > > Nicholas Clark > > --- End of Forwarded Message -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Exmh CVS iD8DBQFBeWAmMJF5cimLx9ARAr+JAKCW+PIOEg5iN8JppRXMFH7yihg1ygCgphW8 oKYf/lCr58Rz5kBrvqvc4iE= =JyLH -END PGP SIGNATURE-
When did that module first become core? (fwd)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 nifty! - --- Forwarded Message > Date:Fri, 22 Oct 2004 08:59:34 -0500 > From:Andy Lester <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: perl5 Porters > Subject: When did that module first become core? > > > What first perl version this method is available in? perlsec should > > give > > techniques working across a reasonable number of older perls. at least > > 5.6.x? > > Scalar-List-Utils has been around for much longer, but wasn't in the > core until 5.8.0. > > I'd like to point out the swell Module::CoreList module maintained by > Richard Clamp. It answers all your core questions: > > $ corelist Scalar::Util > Scalar::Util was first released with perl 5.007003 > > It also knows first versions, as in when someone asked me yesterday > "when did prove become part of the Perl core?" Well, since > Test::Harness added prove in 2.32, then: > > $ corelist Test::Harness 2.32 > Test::Harness 2.32 was released with perl 5.008003 > > Richard deserves many beers for this. > > xoxo, > Andy > > -- > Andy Lester => [EMAIL PROTECTED] => www.petdance.com => AIM:petdance > > --- End of Forwarded Message -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Exmh CVS iD8DBQFBeV+SMJF5cimLx9ARAvzaAKCUoSmrv0xa+KH1Iwch1Vtx/UBD0QCfThT7 nc6P8m7TQSKX45W7nP4/Li0= =FYBh -END PGP SIGNATURE-
[Bug 3917] SpamC is reporting "failed sanity check" on some messages
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3917 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-22 11:55 --- Well I reinstalled Cygwin and SA using the latest CVS build, still having the same problem. --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.
[Bug 3917] SpamC is reporting "failed sanity check" on some messages
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3917 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-22 10:07 --- Just tried the latest CVS build I got the following results: D:\ESA>zspamc-alt2 -x < zs2.out > zs2a.out failed sanity check, 109044 bytes claimed, 33721 bytes seen D:\ESA>zspamc-alt2 -x < zs2.out > zs2a.out failed sanity check, 109044 bytes claimed, 34745 bytes seen D:\ESA>zspamc-alt2 -x < zs2.out > zs2a.out failed sanity check, 109044 bytes claimed, 33721 bytes seen D:\ESA>zspamc-alt2 -x < zs2.out > zs2a.out failed sanity check, 109044 bytes claimed, 97209 bytes seen D:\ESA>zspamc-alt2 -x < zs2.out > zs2a.out failed sanity check, 109044 bytes claimed, 34745 bytes seen D:\ESA>zspamc-alt2 -x < zs2.out > zs2a.out failed sanity check, 109044 bytes claimed, 33721 bytes seen D:\ESA>zspamc-alt2 -x < zs2.out > zs2a.out D:\ESA>zspamc-alt2 -x < zs2.out > zs2a.out failed sanity check, 109058 bytes claimed, 34745 bytes seen D:\ESA>zspamc-alt2 -x < zs2.out > zs2a.out failed sanity check, 109058 bytes claimed, 33721 bytes seen D:\ESA>zspamc-alt2 -x < zs2.out > zs2a.out failed sanity check, 109058 bytes claimed, 34745 bytes seen D:\ESA>zspamc-alt2 -x < zs2.out > zs2a.out failed sanity check, 109058 bytes claimed, 33721 bytes seen D:\ESA>zspamc-alt2 -x < zs2.out > zs2a.out failed sanity check, 109058 bytes claimed, 33721 bytes seen D:\ESA>zspamc-alt2 -x < zs2.out > zs2a.out D:\ESA>zspamc-alt2 -x < zs2.out > zs2a.out failed sanity check, 109058 bytes claimed, 33721 bytes seen D:\ESA>zspamc-alt2 -x < zs2.out > zs2a.out failed sanity check, 109058 bytes claimed, 34745 bytes seen D:\ESA>zspamc-alt2 -x < zs2.out > zs2a.out failed sanity check, 109058 bytes claimed, 33721 bytes seen D:\ESA>zspamc-alt2 -x < zs2.out > zs2a.out failed sanity check, 109058 bytes claimed, 33721 bytes seen D:\ESA>zspamc-alt2 -x < zs2.out > zs2a.out failed sanity check, 109058 bytes claimed, 33721 bytes seen D:\ESA>zspamc-alt2 -x < zs2.out > zs2a.out failed sanity check, 109058 bytes claimed, 34745 bytes seen D:\ESA>zspamc-alt2 -x < zs2.out > zs2a.out failed sanity check, 109058 bytes claimed, 33721 bytes seen D:\ESA>zspamc-alt2 -x < zs2.out > zs2a.out failed sanity check, 109058 bytes claimed, 33721 bytes seen D:\ESA>zspamc-alt2 -x < zs2.out > zs2a.out D:\ESA>zspamc-alt2 -x < zs2.out > zs2a.out failed sanity check, 109058 bytes claimed, 34745 bytes seen D:\ESA>zspamc-alt2 -x < zs2.out > zs2a.out failed sanity check, 109058 bytes claimed, 33721 bytes seen D:\ESA>zspamc-alt2 -x < zs2.out > zs2a.out failed sanity check, 109058 bytes claimed, 85945 bytes seen D:\ESA>zspamc-alt2 -x < zs2.out > zs2a.out failed sanity check, 109058 bytes claimed, 34745 bytes seen D:\ESA>zspamc-alt2 -x < zs2.out > zs2a.out failed sanity check, 109058 bytes claimed, 33721 bytes seen D:\ESA>zspamc-alt2 -x < zs2.out > zs2a.out failed sanity check, 109058 bytes claimed, 33721 bytes seen D:\ESA>zspamc-alt2 -x < zs2.out > zs2a.out failed sanity check, 109058 bytes claimed, 33721 bytes seen D:\ESA>zspamc-alt2 -x < zs2.out > zs2a.out failed sanity check, 109058 bytes claimed, 54201 bytes seen D:\ESA>zspamc-alt2 -x < zs2.out > zs2a.out failed sanity check, 109058 bytes claimed, 34745 bytes seen D:\ESA>zspamc-alt2 -x < zs2.out > zs2a.out failed sanity check, 109058 bytes claimed, 33721 bytes seen D:\ESA>zspamc-alt2 -x < zs2.out > zs2a.out failed sanity check, 109058 bytes claimed, 33721 bytes seen D:\ESA>zspamc-alt2 -x < zs2.out > zs2a.out failed sanity check, 109058 bytes claimed, 33721 bytes seen D:\ESA>zspamc-alt2 -x < zs2.out > zs2a.out failed sanity check, 109058 bytes claimed, 33721 bytes seen D:\ESA>zspamc-alt2 -x < zs2.out > zs2a.out failed sanity check, 109058 bytes claimed, 87993 bytes seen D:\ESA>zspamc-alt2 -x < zs2.out > zs2a.out failed sanity check, 109058 bytes claimed, 34745 bytes seen D:\ESA>zspamc-alt2 -x < zs2.out > zs2a.out failed sanity check, 109058 bytes claimed, 33721 bytes seen D:\ESA>zspamc-alt2 -x < zs2.out > zs2a.out failed sanity check, 109058 bytes claimed, 33721 bytes seen D:\ESA>zspamc-alt2 -x < zs2.out > zs2a.out failed sanity check, 109058 bytes claimed, 33721 bytes seen D:\ESA>zspamc-alt2 -x < zs2.out > zs2a.out You may notice that out of a number of runs some of them worked correctly, this is very bizar. I think I will remove cygwin and rebuild. --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.
[Bug 3767] Request awl_sql_override_username configuration parameter
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3767 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-22 08:35 --- Created an attachment (id=2477) --> (http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/attachment.cgi?id=2477&action=view) SQL AWL username override against 3.0.0 release Adds similar functionality as bayes_sql_override_username, for SQL AWL. Includes Conf.pm patch to add user_awl_sql_override_username option. Long, but it flows with the existing option names. --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.
[Bug 3833] SQL errors with oracle DBI
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3833 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-22 06:57 --- Try changing line 152 of that file from: $text .= "$row[0]\t$row[1]\n"; to: $text .= "$row[0]\t$row[1]\n" if (defined($row[0]) && defined($row[1])); I don't have access to an Oracle server to test it out, but it sounds like Oracle returns undef/null for empty columns, unlike MySQL which (IIRC) returns an empty string (or the default column value) in such a situation. --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.
[Bug 3915] spamassassin sometimes skips to do bayes test
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3915 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-22 06:57 --- hmm, maybe. I have cleaned my spamfolder, so I can't say if you're right or wrong. I'll wait for such accident and check if emails without BAYES has no equivalents which came earlier and was classified properly. --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.
[Bug 3917] SpamC is reporting "failed sanity check" on some messages
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3917 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-22 05:44 --- Created an attachment (id=2476) --> (http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/attachment.cgi?id=2476&action=view) my spamc.exe Here is the spamc from my cygwin build, incase it might be useful. --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.
[Bug 3917] SpamC is reporting "failed sanity check" on some messages
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3917 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-22 05:42 --- Created an attachment (id=2475) --> (http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/attachment.cgi?id=2475&action=view) same zs2.out sample with resultant zs2a.out and Debug from SpamD Here is the Debug from SpamD along with the in and out file that was produced from the command: spamc < zs2.out > zs2a.out When I use the -x Command for spamc it will return an Error 76 "EX_PROTOCOL 76 remote error in protocol" --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.
[Bug 3915] spamassassin sometimes skips to do bayes test
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3915 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-22 05:37 --- The message isn't being auto-learned the first time through, is it? This would explain bayes assigning a probability the second time through, since it would then have enough tokens. --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.
[Bug 3771] PostgreSQL Specific Bayes Storage Module
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3771 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #2335 is|0 |1 obsolete|| --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-21 21:27 --- Created an attachment (id=2474) --> (http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/attachment.cgi?id=2474&action=view) Patch File New patch file. This makes the scan time go from 37 secs to around 1 sec per message. Learn is around 1.3 messages per second. The difference is that instead of doing a select/update where token in (list of binary tokens) I do individual updates. My guess is that PostgreSQL doesn't like that query with the bytea values in the list. If someone is interested, I've got a logfile of all the statements and basic statistics if someone is interested. There are a couple of them, before the change and after, that total for around 10 gigs uncompressed and > 8.5 million queries. --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.
[Bug 3917] SpamC is reporting "failed sanity check" on some messages
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3917 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-21 21:24 --- My initial test usaing zs2.out did not reproduce the problem, using 3.01 svn branch and running spamc and spamd under Cygwin. I'll have to check it more thoroughly when I get a chance to tonight. What flags are you using to run spamd? If you run spamd -D do you see any useful error messages? --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.
[Bug 3917] SpamC is reporting "failed sanity check" on some messages
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3917 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-21 21:06 --- Created an attachment (id=2473) --> (http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/attachment.cgi?id=2473&action=view) One more sample The sample that I just attached I tried several times and recieved this: D:\ESA>spamc300 < zs2.out > zs2a.out failed sanity check, 109048 bytes claimed, 33721 bytes seen --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.
[Bug 3917] SpamC is reporting "failed sanity check" on some messages
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3917 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-21 20:42 --- As a test I tried converting a test message, using a DOS2UNIX utility, before sending it to SpamD. I got the same results. SpamD is only return a portion of the original message, which is what is causing the sanity check to fail. I have noticed that the amount of the original message returned seems to vary a little with each submission. --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.
[Bug 3917] SpamC is reporting "failed sanity check" on some messages
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3917 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-21 20:33 --- I submitted a copy of the samples as a zipped file. Most messages are being properly processed only a small percentage are having this problem. I have noticed that most if not all of the problem messages are multipart-mime files. As for the Dos v/ Unix newline issue I don't know. I have set cygwin to DOS style newlines. All of the files being sent to SpamD should have CRLF line endings. If it is a problem with the newline ending why would only a small percentage of message have a problem. --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.
[Bug 3917] SpamC is reporting "failed sanity check" on some messages
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3917 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-21 20:27 --- Created an attachment (id=2472) --> (http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/attachment.cgi?id=2472&action=view) Zipped copy of attachment samples --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.
[Bug 3917] SpamC is reporting "failed sanity check" on some messages
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3917 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-21 19:55 --- Can you check if it has anything to do with the mail message having DOS vs unix newlines? That would be hidden in the attachments you posted unless you zipped them and attached the zip files. --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.
Re: VOTE: release 3.0.1
Hey, what the heck, it's a voting day (I got my absentee ballot sent off today) +1 -- sidney
Re: VOTE: release 3.0.1
For the record: +1 That should do it. -- Daniel Quinlan ApacheCon! 13-17 November (3 SpamAssassin http://www.pathname.com/~quinlan/ http://www.apachecon.com/ sessions & more)
[Bug 3917] SpamC is reporting "failed sanity check" on some messages
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3917 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-21 19:03 --- I have attached four messages that recieved this error. --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.
[Bug 3917] SpamC is reporting "failed sanity check" on some messages
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3917 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-21 19:03 --- Created an attachment (id=2471) --> (http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/attachment.cgi?id=2471&action=view) Sample #4 --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.
[Bug 3917] SpamC is reporting "failed sanity check" on some messages
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3917 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-21 19:02 --- Created an attachment (id=2470) --> (http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/attachment.cgi?id=2470&action=view) Sample #3 --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.
[Bug 3917] SpamC is reporting "failed sanity check" on some messages
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3917 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-21 19:02 --- Created an attachment (id=2469) --> (http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/attachment.cgi?id=2469&action=view) Sample#2 --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.
[Bug 3917] New: SpamC is reporting "failed sanity check" on some messages
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3917 Summary: SpamC is reporting "failed sanity check" on some messages Product: Spamassassin Version: 3.0.0 Platform: PC OS/Version: Windows 2000 Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P5 Component: spamc/spamd AssignedTo: dev@spamassassin.apache.org ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Build SpamAssassin on Cygwin/Win2k3 system. Using SpamC built from the 3.0.0 distribution, using Cygwin. When certain messages are submited to SpamD using SpamC I get the "failed sanity check" error reporting that the file size returned is smaller than what was submitted. The SpamC client also returns an Error 76 "remote error in protocol" when I use the "-x" option. I will be happy to supply samples of files that have gotten this error, just contact me and let me know where to send the files. --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.
Re: VOTE: release 3.0.1
On Thu, Oct 21, 2004 at 06:07:57PM -0700, Dan Quinlan wrote: > I propose we release SpamAssassin 3.0.1. All bugs are closed now. +1 -- Randomly Generated Tagline: "What part of 'no' don't you understand? Is it the 'N', or the 'Zero'?" - Quotes from Induhviduals, Dilbert Newsletter 55 pgpAzFmXxi3rN.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: VOTE: release 3.0.1
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Daniel Quinlan writes: > I propose we release SpamAssassin 3.0.1. All bugs are closed now. +1 -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Exmh CVS iD8DBQFBeGTKMJF5cimLx9ARAnavAJ9hJN088VrH7LM1eHiPXr9DJ7xeLACght6V 3dqofd78+gOrQqUKyk5FLBs= =D2/q -END PGP SIGNATURE-
[Bug 3916] deprecate RCVD_IN_RFC_IPWHOIS
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3916 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-21 18:12 --- +1 --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.
VOTE: release 3.0.1
I propose we release SpamAssassin 3.0.1. All bugs are closed now. Daniel -- Daniel Quinlan ApacheCon! 13-17 November (3 SpamAssassin http://www.pathname.com/~quinlan/ http://www.apachecon.com/ sessions & more)
[Bug 3916] deprecate RCVD_IN_RFC_IPWHOIS
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3916 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|3.0.1 |3.1.0 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-21 18:06 --- moving to 3.1 milestone since a replacement is possible --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.
[Bug 3916] deprecate RCVD_IN_RFC_IPWHOIS
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3916 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-21 18:06 --- Committed revision 55292. (to 3.0 branch) --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.
[Bug 3915] spamassassin sometimes skips to do bayes test
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3915 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-21 18:05 --- Problem is, that I cannot reproduce bug by hand. The same message, which arrives without BAYES test, processed again behaves properly. So cause is unknown for me now, seems to be random. Due to above, I don't think it's related to not enough tokens. --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.
[Bug 3916] deprecate RCVD_IN_RFC_IPWHOIS
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3916 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-21 17:22 --- +1 --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.
[Bug 3916] deprecate RCVD_IN_RFC_IPWHOIS
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3916 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|Future |3.0.1 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-21 17:09 --- 3.0.1 milestone --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.
[Bug 3916] New: deprecate RCVD_IN_RFC_IPWHOIS
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3916 Summary: deprecate RCVD_IN_RFC_IPWHOIS Product: Spamassassin Version: 3.0.0 Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: major Priority: P1 Component: Rules (Eval Tests) AssignedTo: dev@spamassassin.apache.org ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] The word is that RFC-Ignorant IP whois is going away really really soon. We should remove it from 3.0.1. --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.
