After skipping zlib, it went through but gave me again this error,
Installing djbdns-1.05-1.0.2 in the sandbox ...
error: Failed dependencies:
djbdns-extcache conflicts with djbdns-1.05-1.0.2.i686
djbdns conflicts with djbdns-extcache-1.05-1.0.2.i686
djbdns-localcache confl
Type "rpm -Uhv --oldpackage zlib*".
As far as i386 vs. i686, it doesn't matter on anything higher than a
P2. The i686 is more optimized, the i386 is generic enough to run on
just about any x86 compatible machine.
Erik
On 10/31/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I am now getting t
I am now getting the following errors during upgrading my qt using new
model script.
qtp-build-rpms v0.1.3
Building zlib-1.2.3-1.0.3 ...
Installing zlib-1.2.3-1.0.3 in the sandbox ...
qtp-build-rpms - rpm -Uvh failed for zlib-1.2.3-1.0.3
qtp-build-rpms - see
/opt/qtp-sandbox/usr/src/qtp-upgrade/lo
I'll fix it on the next SpamAssassin release. At this pace, it should
be by tomorrow.
Erik
On 10/31/06, Quinn Comendant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
The spamassassin local.cf file included with the qmail toaster has the "required_hits"
option instead of the new required_score one. Not really "ba
The spamassassin local.cf file included with the qmail toaster has the
"required_hits" option instead of the new required_score one. Not really "bad"
but...
required_score n.nn (default: 5)
Set the score required before a mail is considered spam. n.nn can be an
integer or a real number. 5.0
When testing is required, it might pay to put a call out to users in the list - I know I would definitely respond. Im very interested in dspam, through my own failed test installs."Eric \"Shubes\"" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Justice London wrote:> Well, apparently I lied. I'm not going to have time
Eric "Shubes" wrote:
> Would forwarding distort the message since it would appear to be coming from
> the recipient (forwarder) instead of the original sender? How would dspam
> handle this?
Forwarding the message to a spam/ham training address will distort the
message but dspam won't care. When
Jake Vickers wrote:
> Eric "Shubes" wrote:
>> Lee R. Copp wrote:
>>
>>> Rangi Biddle wrote:
>>>
With your setup, does it allow pop3 clients to download less spam? Just
wondering as this would be an easier approach considering you could filter
mail marked as spam into a mail f
Well, apparently I lied. I'm not going to have time this week to work on the
dspam stuff.
Justice London
-Original Message-
From: Eric "Shubes" [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, October 31, 2006 8:38 AM
To: qmailtoaster-list@qmailtoaster.com
Subject: Re: [qmailtoaster] Dspam on th
Justice London wrote:
> Well, apparently I lied. I'm not going to have time this week to work on the
> dspam stuff.
>
> Justice London
>
That's ok, Justice. There's no hurry. Slow and steady wins the race! If we
get anything going at all on this by the end of the year, I'll be happy. ;)
--
-Er
Lee R. Copp wrote:
> Rangi Biddle wrote:
>> With your setup, does it allow pop3 clients to download less spam? Just
>> wondering as this would be an easier approach considering you could filter
>> mail marked as spam into a mail folder and train Dspam that way.
>
> POP3 would work fine except for
Eric "Shubes" wrote:
Lee R. Copp wrote:
Rangi Biddle wrote:
With your setup, does it allow pop3 clients to download less spam? Just
wondering as this would be an easier approach considering you could filter
mail marked as spam into a mail folder and train Dspam that
David Sánchez Martín wrote:
>
>>> That sounds like it's worth a try, but I kinda doubt that it'd be
>>> effective.
>>> spamd spawns the processes that actually do the spam checking (spamd
>>> child), so those are the processes you'd really need to 'nice'. I
>>> don't know if the children pick
Rangi Biddle wrote:
> With your setup, does it allow pop3 clients to download less spam? Just
> wondering as this would be an easier approach considering you could filter
> mail marked as spam into a mail folder and train Dspam that way.
POP3 would work fine except for the training portion of dspa
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Citando "Eric \\\"Shubes\\\"" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>> I've had something similar when updating to 3.1.6 -
>>> had to install perl Digest:SHA1 from cpan, clean up /var/lib/spamassassin
>> and
>>> reinstall. afterwards sa-update and things we
>> That sounds like it's worth a try, but I kinda doubt that it'd be
>> effective.
>> spamd spawns the processes that actually do the spam checking (spamd
>> child), so those are the processes you'd really need to 'nice'. I
>> don't know if the children pick up the nice level of the parent or
I don't know about roaming users per se. What are you trying to accomplish?
That being said, have you looked into /var/qmail/control/rcpthosts?
Quinn Comendant wrote:
> Hi y'all
>
> How can I troubleshoot why roaming users isn't working for me? I've compiled
> vpopmail with --enable-roaming-use
Eric "Shubes" wrote:
I was wondering about dspam w/ pop3. This answers a lot of questions.
I'm disappointed to see that Netscape doesn't have a redirect option.
However, there *is* a mailredirect extension for Mozilla Thunderbird (0.7
and above) and Mozilla Mail. I don't know if this would work
Simone Marzona wrote:
> Eric "Shubes" wrote:
>> Simone Marzona wrote:
>>> Hi all
>>>
>>> how is possible to set nice level on spamassassin on mandriva?
>>>
>>> On Debian systems it's configured in /etc/default/spamassassin
>>> nice-level.
>>>
>>> I could simply put a "nice x" value before "spamd.."
It shows up in your webmail under the trash
thanks
Q
On Tue, 2006-10-31 at 13:12 +0800, Ho wrote:
> Where is the spam box? I cannot see that.
>
> Ho
>
> Kyle Quillen wrote:
> > Ho,
> >
> > I ran the install with mine and let it run. When I woke up this morning
> > the spam box was in my
Citando "Eric \\\"Shubes\\\"" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > I've had something similar when updating to 3.1.6 -
> > had to install perl Digest:SHA1 from cpan, clean up /var/lib/spamassassin
> and
> > reinstall. afterwards sa-update and things went smoothly, even when going
>
Eric "Shubes" wrote:
Simone Marzona wrote:
Hi all
how is possible to set nice level on spamassassin on mandriva?
On Debian systems it's configured in /etc/default/spamassassin nice-level.
I could simply put a "nice x" value before "spamd.." in
/var/qmail/supervise/spamd/run?
That sounds lik
Argument list too long means that * expands in too much
files.
If you use bash, create an script like
this
---cut
here---
#!/bin/bash
cd DIRECTORYWITHMAILS # The mailbox with
spam
for file in *; do
# Do here whatever you like to d
23 matches
Mail list logo
