On Monday 19 May 2008 23:41, mouss wrote:
> Stefan Jakobs wrote:
> > Hello list,
> >
> > I tried to verify the results of Mike Capella's amavis-logwatch scripts
> > and had to notice that the amavislogsumm.pl scripts had some faults. I
> > fixed them and put the new script online:
> > https://po2.u
Stefan Jakobs wrote:
> Hello list,
>
> I tried to verify the results of Mike Capella's amavis-logwatch scripts and
> had to notice that the amavislogsumm.pl scripts had some faults. I fixed them
> and put the new script online:
> https://po2.uni-stuttgart.de/~rusjako/amavislogsumm
>
> I recommen
* Stefan Jakobs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [05-19-2008]:
> I recommend to use amavis-logwatch (I use it too)
+1. Mike does a great job on updating patterns et cetera.
--
Sahil Tandon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
-
This SF.net email is sp
Hello list,
I tried to verify the results of Mike Capella's amavis-logwatch scripts and
had to notice that the amavislogsumm.pl scripts had some faults. I fixed them
and put the new script online:
https://po2.uni-stuttgart.de/~rusjako/amavislogsumm
I recommend to use amavis-logwatch (I use it
Hi,
sent yesterday this patch as attachment but apparently didn't get
through the mailing list.
I patched amavislogsumm so that it handles correctly 2.3.3 log format,
and added the count of how many messages were spamautolearnt.
Please excuse the base64 copy and paste, but this is the only w
I'm running Postfix 2.1.5 with amavisd-new 2.2.0 and have set amavisd-new
logging to level 2.
I'm using the 'older' amavislogsumm script by Sascha Hudepohl as the newer one
by Matt Egan returns zero for all the bayes tests.
This has been running fine for a while then recently I started receivin
