http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3822
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|SA is not fully compatible |warn during "make" if module
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3831
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-09-27 16:30 ---
Faster and more accurate sounds like a good improvement. :-)
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are wa
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3825
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-09-27 16:29 ---
Subject: Re: Unescaped '#' in rawbody causes havoc
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Daniel Quinlan writes:
> Justin Mason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wri
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Daniel Quinlan writes:
> Justin Mason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > That would be a major change in how our configuration files are parsed,
> > breaking a documented (although not particularly clearly) convention
> > that's been there since the p
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3830
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|Future |3.0.1
--- Additional Comment
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3825
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-09-27 16:12 ---
Subject: Re: Unescaped '#' in rawbody causes havoc
Justin Mason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> That would be a major change in how our configuration files are p
Justin Mason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> That would be a major change in how our configuration files are parsed,
> breaking a documented (although not particularly clearly) convention
> that's been there since the project began. It's also inconsistent with
> the convention for this configurati
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3825
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-09-27 16:06 ---
Subject: Re: Unescaped '#' in rawbody causes havoc
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Daniel Quinlan writes:
> I think it would be better if we did
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Daniel Quinlan writes:
> I think it would be better if we did not allow end-of-line comments and
> required all comments to match:
>
> /^\s*#/
>
> Then comments don't need to be escaped. I think that would involve less
> surprise and also solves
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3825
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-09-27 15:57 ---
Subject: Re: Unescaped '#' in rawbody causes havoc
On Mon, Sep 27, 2004 at 03:49:59PM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Then comments don't need to be escaped.
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3825
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-09-27 15:56 ---
fwiw, the "something # some comment" case is explicitly valid IIRC and always
has been -- and is dealt with. so I don't htink that needs to be changed.
agreed
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3821
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-09-27 15:55 ---
whoa, fair enough. good luck with the thesis! ;)
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the ass
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3825
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-09-27 15:49 ---
Subject: Re: Unescaped '#' in rawbody causes havoc
I think it would be better if we did not allow end-of-line comments and
required all comments to match:
/^\
I think it would be better if we did not allow end-of-line comments and
required all comments to match:
/^\s*#/
Then comments don't need to be escaped. I think that would involve less
surprise and also solves the problem. I don't think this is purely a
documentation problem.
Daniel
--
Dani
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3825
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-09-27 15:45 ---
Subject: Re: Unescaped '#' in rawbody causes havoc
On Mon, Sep 27, 2004 at 03:23:57PM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> which is what borks it all up. I'm looki
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3825
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dev@spamassassin.apache.org
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3821
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-09-27 15:08 ---
Henry,
understood, i will approach this problem based on your suggestion and see how i
can improve the situation. much appriciated.
--- You are receiving t
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3832
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3821
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-09-27 14:58 ---
Subject: Re: scores are overoptimized for training set
This sounds like a reasonable approach. I can't help out with it at the
moment, though. My thesis needs
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3821
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-09-27 14:51 ---
Subject: Re: scores are overoptimized for training set
Hi Dimitris,
The scores were generated from a sample of over 85 e-mails submitted
by multiple users.
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3821
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-09-27 14:21 ---
'BTW, this is the "rule reliability tflag" idea again; basically provide a way
to hint that this rule is reliable, and this rule should not be considered
reliable
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3833
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-09-27 14:21 ---
This happends when the preference in the DB has no value, for example, empty
whitelist_from.
Marco.
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You ar
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3821
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-09-27 14:16 ---
'I like your idea concerning "harder to defeat" rules. I'd also suggest a
classification of "more likely to be correct", which would include
- obfuscation rules
On Mon, Sep 27, 2004 at 06:19:03PM +0200, Malte S. Stretz wrote:
> As much as I loved to have this thing renamed, why didn't we do this
> *before* we released 3.0? Or to quote you from bug 3668: "there's *no way*
3.0 dragged on for a long time. We really should have finished the API
changes be
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3833
Summary: SQL errors with oracle DBI
Product: Spamassassin
Version: 3.0.0
Platform: Sun
OS/Version: Solaris
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P5
Com
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3822
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Resolution|WORKSF
On Monday 27 September 2004 18:19 CET Malte S. Stretz wrote:
> On Sunday 26 September 2004 10:42 CET Daniel Quinlan wrote:
> >[...]
> > Do we really need to do this now? This is not going to significantly
> > help performance, accuracy, or memory usage, is it?
>
> As much as I loved to have this t
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3822
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3822
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-09-27 12:36 ---
Subject: Re: New: SA is not fully compatible with Perl 5.6.1
> WARNING:
> After installing SA on a Perl 5.6.1 system, the admin will NOT get any error
> messages
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3831
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|RegistrarBoundaries module |[review] RegistrarBoundaries
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3831
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-09-27 12:08 ---
Created an attachment (id=2376)
--> (http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/attachment.cgi?id=2376&action=view)
suggested patch
--- You are receiving this mail
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3831
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|URIDNSBL Plugin Doesn't |RegistrarBoundaries module
On Mon, Sep 27, 2004 at 11:25:12AM -0700, Dan Quinlan wrote:
> Doing early exit via a plugin is not the right way. The Scan module
> should be subclassed with multiple scanning techniques which define
> their own check() function. And, yes, that is about both performance
> and flexibility. I'm n
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3806
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-09-27 11:35 ---
I just looked at the code for Sys::Hostname. It uses the system hostname
command as a last resort istead of the first thing to try. It also does
not use --fqdn o
On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Matt Sergeant wrote:
> You can use for (0.. $#{$self->{conf}->{biglistofrulenames}}) and then
> reference direct into the array.
Probably won't help; I'm sure there are hundreds of places where assignment
to "my" variables takes place, and chasing them all down is a nightmare
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3831
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-09-27 11:25 ---
In debugging this more, I've found a bunch of FQDNs which don't get parsed down
into domains
properly in the current 3.0.0 code:
consumer.3com.com (com.co)
www2
>>> move check_tick plugin call to bottom of priority loop, clean up some
>>> whitespace/comments
>> Why? What's the effect on performance and otherwise?
Theo Van Dinter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> This is related to my wanting to make shortcut (aka early exit) a
> plugin, but ignoring that..
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3832
Summary: $TMPDIR causes spamd to hang
Product: Spamassassin
Version: 3.0.0
Platform: PC
OS/Version: Linux
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Comp
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3831
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-09-27 10:22 ---
Created an attachment (id=2375)
--> (http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/attachment.cgi?id=2375&action=view)
Sample Spam this Issue Occured On
--- You are re
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3831
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-09-27 10:15 ---
and the problem is ...
the urls include:
net.in
which matches the RE for a 2 level TLD. basically, our REs aren't strict
enough to specify that the net.in
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3831
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dev@spamassassin.apache.org
On 27 Sep 2004, at 15:30, David F. Skoll wrote:
On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Matt Sergeant wrote:
You can use for (0.. $#{$self->{conf}->{biglistofrulenames}}) and then
reference direct into the array.
Probably won't help; I'm sure there are hundreds of places where
assignment
to "my" variables takes plac
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3831
Summary: URIDNSBL Plugin Doesn't Correctly Extract .info URIs
Product: Spamassassin
Version: 3.0.0
Platform: Other
OS/Version: other
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3801
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-09-27 09:49 ---
Subject: Re: [review] MUAs handle lack of newline between message header and
body for MIME parts
On Sun, Sep 26, 2004 at 04:59:55PM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wro
On Sun, Sep 26, 2004 at 01:43:24AM -0700, Dan Quinlan wrote:
> > move check_tick plugin call to bottom of priority loop, clean up some
> > whitespace/comments
>
> Why? What's the effect on performance and otherwise?
This is related to my wanting to make shortcut (aka early exit) a plugin, but
ig
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3806
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
URL||http://wiki.apache.org/spama
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3828
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-09-27 09:30 ---
Subject: Re: New: spamd parent stops accepting requests
On Mon, Sep 27, 2004 at 06:46:11AM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> trying to echo|spamc never returns..
On Mon, 27 Sep 2004 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Author: mss
> Date: Mon Sep 27 09:02:02 2004
> New Revision: 47300
>
> Modified:
>spamassassin/trunk/lib/Mail/SpamAssassin/Message/Metadata/Received.pm
> Log:
> Added a comment: The exim Received header is indeed scriptable.
See http://bugzilla.
On Sunday 26 September 2004 10:42 CET Daniel Quinlan wrote:
>[...]
> Do we really need to do this now? This is not going to significantly
> help performance, accuracy, or memory usage, is it?
As much as I loved to have this thing renamed, why didn't we do this
*before* we released 3.0? Or to qu
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3830
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-09-27 08:42 ---
Created an attachment (id=2374)
--> (http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/attachment.cgi?id=2374&action=view)
example message
--- You are receiving this mail
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3830
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-09-27 08:35 ---
Could you please attach a sample mail if possible?
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the a
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3830
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-09-27 08:33 ---
Created an attachment (id=2373)
--> (http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/attachment.cgi?id=2373&action=view)
patch to improve the regex
--- You are receiving
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3811
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-09-27 08:30 ---
The weird thing is that 6.21_03 is a valid floating point number in Perl, at
least since 5.6.0 I think (I tried it with 5.6.1). The underscore is just
there to
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3830
Summary: another pattern for return paths in Received: headers
Product: Spamassassin
Version: 3.0.0
Platform: Other
OS/Version: other
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3821
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-09-27 08:15 ---
Henry,
In theory, your ideas are good. Though in practice they are not as effective.
Allow me to explain my point of view.
Your theory is based on the axiom that
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3829
Summary: Web Page http://spamassassin.apache.org/doc.html
incorrectly references "README for the 'spamd' module"
Product: Spamassassin
Version: unspecified
Platform: Other
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3821
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-09-27 07:28 ---
Subject: Re: scores are overoptimized for training set
Hi Matthias,
Mike Brzozowski at Stanford's AI lab has been doing experiments using
support vector machin
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3811
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-09-27 07:06 ---
perl -MExtUtils::MakeMaker -le 'print $ExtUtils::MakeMaker::VERSION'
6.21_03
perl Makefile.PL
Argument "6.21_03" isn't numeric in subroutine entry at Makefile.
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3828
Summary: spamd parent stops accepting requests
Product: Spamassassin
Version: 3.0.0
Platform: Other
OS/Version: other
Status: NEW
Severity: major
Priority: P5
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3811
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dev@spamassassin.apache.org
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3806
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-09-27 06:35 ---
I probably have an unusual installation, but it is quite possible to have
your Prel installation owned by a normal user (user tools & group tools in
our case). You
On 24 Sep 2004, at 03:26, Justin Mason wrote:
argh, yes:
foreach my $rule (@{$self->{conf}->{biglistofrulenames}) {
# do something read-only with $rule
}
you're right, that *will* incr the refcount on every entry in
that array, touching the page and triggering copy-on-write.
You can u
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3821
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-09-27 05:22 ---
The bug shows two principle problems with perceptrons:
1.) They are only guaranteed to converge on a local optimum.
2.) They, in general, have not protection from
Hi,
I'm running exim on a Solaris box with mail for certain users being piped
through spamc (V2.63), which is using a newly built Fedora core 2 spamd
(V3.0.0) server. (This server did have 2.64 on, but was upgraded through CPAN).
I'm getting the following errors in the spamd server's log:
Sep
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3827
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|Future |3.0.1
--- You are receivin
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3827
Summary: SURBL ccTLD list updated, please update SA TLD code
Product: Spamassassin
Version: SVN Trunk (Latest Devel Version)
Platform: Other
URL: http://spamcheck.freeapp.net/two-level-t
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3826
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|Future |3.0.1
--- Additional Comment
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3826
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-09-26 23:46 ---
Created an attachment (id=2372)
--> (http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/attachment.cgi?id=2372&action=view)
Logs grep-ed from maillog. Includes explanitory comments
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3826
Summary: required_score (required_hits) for specfic users seems
to be broken
Product: Spamassassin
Version: 3.0.0
Platform: Other
OS/Version: Linux
Status: NEW
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3825
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|Future |3.0.1
--- Additional Comment
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3825
Summary: Unescaped '#' in rawbody causes havoc
Product: Spamassassin
Version: 3.0.0
Platform: Sun
OS/Version: Solaris
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P5
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3821
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-09-26 18:19 ---
Subject: Re: scores are overoptimized for training set
> I like your idea concerning "harder to defeat" rules. I'd also suggest a
> classification of "more lik
> I like your idea concerning "harder to defeat" rules. I'd also suggest a
> classification of "more likely to be correct", which would include
I think "more likely to be correct" is more or less already handled by
the perceptron, training with sufficient ham, and the score ranging
code.
--
D
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3821
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-09-26 17:31 ---
I like your idea concerning "harder to defeat" rules. I'd also suggest a
classification of "more likely to be correct", which would include
- obfuscation rules
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3649
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|Future |3.0.1
--- Additional Comment
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3649
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-09-26 17:08 ---
I was about to bump this up to a target milestone of 3.0.1, then decided that
should be Malte's call, since it's his patch. Malte, do you agree we should do
that?
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3649
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--- You
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3649
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--- Additi
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3823
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3801
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-09-26 16:59 ---
I average about 40k messages a week on my server. I only have data for the last
four days of last week. I ended up with 213 messages like this in those four
days.
80 matches
Mail list logo
