Re: [AMaViS-user] Different results from SA plugin when run through SA vs. amavisd-new

2009-05-19 Thread Mark Martinec
Pete McNeil wrote: > For the sake of other SpamAssassin / AMAVIS developers: > > The SNF4SA antispam plugin that did not work had this line in snf4sa.pm > $permsgstatus->{scoreset}->[$set]->{"SNF4SA"} = > > This version appeared to work correctly when used with SA alone but did > not work correc

Re: [AMaViS-user] Different results from SA plugin when run through SA vs. amavisd-new

2009-05-18 Thread Pete McNeil
Dan Horne wrote: > Hi all, I've been running amavisd-new for several years now with no > issues, but now one has cropped up with an SA plugin that I have need > of. A vendor recently updated their SA plugin and now it returns > different results when run through SA vs. when it is run through > ama

Re: [AMaViS-user] Different results from SA plugin when run through SA vs. amavisd-new

2009-05-15 Thread Sahil Tandon
On Fri, 15 May 2009, Dan Horne wrote: > Another question I have is that these weights don't seem to add up > correctly? From that last one: > (1.37 + 0.001 + 1 + 0.992 != 1.956) Soft black/white listing in amavisd-new? -- Sahil Tandon

[AMaViS-user] Different results from SA plugin when run through SA vs. amavisd-new

2009-05-15 Thread Dan Horne
Hi all, I've been running amavisd-new for several years now with no issues, but now one has cropped up with an SA plugin that I have need of. A vendor recently updated their SA plugin and now it returns different results when run through SA vs. when it is run through amavisd-new/SA. Following are