On Sat, May 11, 2002 at 02:26:55PM -0500, dman wrote:
> This completely depends. First you MUST *profile* to determine where
> the hotspots are. Maybe _those_ pieces of the program would be better
> in C or ASM. Remember that 90% of the execution time is spent in 10%
> of the code (generally).
On Sat, 11 May 2002, Craig R. Hughes wrote:
> Daniel Pittman wrote:
>
> DP> For the first, *nothing* that you do is likely to improve things
> DP> much other than rewriting the rules themselves; this can be done
> DP> equally well with Perl.
>
> Rule optimization is proceeding. You might find a
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Saturday 11 May 2002 09:09 am, Arpi wrote:
> i'vs just uploaded the current snapshot of my version to:
> ftp://ftp.mplayerhq.hu/spamassassin-c_0.2.tar.gz
>
> it is not usable in production yet - it is full of timers
> and debug stuff, for testing a
On Sat, May 11, 2002 at 12:19:28PM -0700, Craig R Hughes wrote:
> Marc MERLIN wrote:
>
> MM> I wrote my sa-exim code with the understanding that all the X-Spam headers
> MM> were single line, with the exception of X-Spam-Report:
> MM> Is this correct and therefore do I have another bug in my code
Wow I had given up on getting a answer to my question !!!
Thanks Craig..
Interesting I didn't know there were variables available to Procmail.
There was discussion on the list of late of a new list. I have noticed
that some newbie questions like mine get skipped over while much or
esoteric q
Hi,
> The only argument I'm making is against the preconceived notion that a
> program in C is always faster than the same program in perl.
agree. there are good c programmers and bad c programmers.
good ones know how to write fast c code - bad ones don't.
good ones usually thinking in lowlevel a
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sat, 11 May 2002, Craig R. Hughes told this:
> cvs annotate is always fun:
>
> bash2.05 craig@balam ~/code/spamassassin % cvs annotate -r1.132
> lib/Mail/SpamAssassin/EvalTests.pm|fgrep 'check_mx' Annotations for
> lib/Mail/SpamAssassin/EvalTests
cvs annotate is always fun:
bash2.05 craig@balam ~/code/spamassassin % cvs annotate -r1.132
lib/Mail/SpamAssassin/EvalTests.pm|fgrep 'check_mx'
Annotations for lib/Mail/SpamAssassin/EvalTests.pm
***
1.132(hughescr 11-May-02): if ($self->{conf}->{check_mx_attempts) < 1) {
Do
dman wrote:
d> On Sat, May 11, 2002 at 12:23:40PM -0700, Craig R Hughes wrote:
d> | dman wrote:
d>
d> | d> This message was _not_ flagged by SA. Who would want to send it
d> | d> anyways? (all intact except for the Received: headers)
d>
d> | Interesting.
d>
d> yeah.
d>
d> | Could be AWL floodin
Olivier M. wrote:
OM> On Sat, May 11, 2002 at 11:01:32AM -0700, Craig R Hughes wrote:
OM> > I just created a new moderated mailing list on SourceForge for project
OM>
OM> good idea :)
OM> maybe you can add infos about this new ML on the spamassassin.org page...
Done.
OM> you could also add a fe
Jesus Climent wrote:
JC> Usually patches, so far, go to the mailing list.
That's discouraged now the volumes are getting higher. Please submit patches
as attachments to bugzilla tickets at http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/
JC> Anyone's comments about the upload of the c code in the cvs?
Well,
tools/check_whitelist -- run as the user for whom you want to check.
Jim Scott wrote:
JS> How does one go about viewing the email addresses in the users whitelist? Is
JS> there a utility to view this?
___
Have big pipes? SourceForge.
Arpi wrote:
A> Hi,
A>
A> > I will add the code to the CVS and put a mark that is still beta code.
A>
A> where should i send the updates later?
We can add it to the spamassassin CVS tree and handle bugfixes/updates through
bugzilla. We can give CVS write access to you for working on the code the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sat, 11 May 2002, Craig R. Hughes stated:
> Doh! Who made that typo and checked it in w/out testing? Should be
> fixed now.
>
It wasn't me boss, I promise :)
Sean
Please I am subscribed to this list
so there is no need to cc me a reply
- --
Doh! Who made that typo and checked it in w/out testing? Should be fixed now.
C
Sean Rima wrote:
SR> Bareword "check_mx_attempts" not allowed while "strict subs" in use at
SR> /usr/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.005/Mail/SpamAssassin/EvalTests.pm line 81.
Daniel Pittman wrote:
DP> For the first, *nothing* that you do is likely to improve things much
DP> other than rewriting the rules themselves; this can be done equally well
DP> with Perl.
Rule optimization is proceeding. You might find a better/faster regex engine,
but you'll probably have to r
On Sat, May 11, 2002 at 12:23:40PM -0700, Craig R Hughes wrote:
| dman wrote:
| d> This message was _not_ flagged by SA. Who would want to send it
| d> anyways? (all intact except for the Received: headers)
| Interesting.
yeah.
| Could be AWL flooding.
Nope. I don't use the AWL. It also
Thanks, checked in to CVS.
xavier renaut wrote:
xr> Here is a small patch to spamproxyd. (current cvs version)
xr> (i joined the patched spamproxyd as well, as it is small enought)
___
Have big pipes? SourceForge.net is looking for d
Kevin, I think this is a useful feature to request. Could you file a bugzilla
ticket if you haven't already, requesting a feature where the subject won't be
munged if it already contains the patterns that would be inserted?
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/
As for the 2nd part, you might want t
Interesting. Could be AWL flooding. Or is this just the text/plain part and
there's also a text/html which had actual images in it?
C
dman wrote:
d>
d> This message was _not_ flagged by SA. Who would want to send it
d> anyways? (all intact except for the Received: headers)
___
On Sat, May 11, 2002 at 04:09:43PM +0200, Arpi wrote:
| (yes, i agree on that perl is usefull thing for text processing, but it is
| no more true when high performance does matter - then asm+c kicks in)
This completely depends. First you MUST *profile* to determine where
the hotspots are. Mayb
Marc MERLIN wrote:
MM> I wrote my sa-exim code with the understanding that all the X-Spam headers
MM> were single line, with the exception of X-Spam-Report:
MM> Is this correct and therefore do I have another bug in my code or is it an
MM> incorrect expectation?
I think it's an incorrect expecta
Ben Jackson wrote:
BJ> Sounds like spamd/spamc is a little faster, but less still less
BJ> configurable...
spamc/spamd is a *lot* faster. Not having to compile several hundred regular
expressions and all the other overhead associated with starting a perl VM is a
*huge* win.
Not sure what you m
Chris wrote:
C> there must be a way to place spamc in the /etc/procmailrc account for
C> system wide use ?
The way I do it is by using spamc's -u flag, and passing it the username (which
might be available in a number of ways depending on how procmail's being
invoked). My spamc invocation line
Klaus Heinz wrote:
KH> This mostly works for me. So far I had one exception where I cannot remove
KH> one address. check_whitelist even shows the address twice when I add it to
KH> the AWL again.
Until the patch I just applied to check_whitelist, it had a display issue where
it would truncate lo
On Sat, May 11, 2002 at 11:01:32AM -0700, Craig R Hughes wrote:
> I just created a new moderated mailing list on SourceForge for project
good idea :)
maybe you can add infos about this new ML on the spamassassin.org page...
> announcements. I think I configured it right. Anyway, go ahead and s
I'll check it in now. It's called "speedtest" and it works according to the
file speedtest.README which I'll write and include in tools/
C
Klaus Heinz wrote:
KH> Craig R Hughes wrote:
KH>
KH> > representative of a wide enough range of spam. I'm going to do a test against
KH> > part of the cor
Daniel Quinlan wrote:
DQ> No, I think it should be possible to tell SA "this is my address,
DQ> treat it differently because spammers do too". MULTI-MATCH may be a
DQ> part of the long-term solution, but I'm going to try to come up with a
DQ> workable short-term solution. :-)
Yes, I think a "t
The autowhitelist is in a binary database format. You can't safely use a text
editor on it. You can use the tools/check_whitelist script to get a nice clean
dump of the AWL contents. Actually, you'll need to either get the current CVS
version or apply the following quick patch:
diff -u -r1.6 -
I just created a new moderated mailing list on SourceForge for project
announcements. I think I configured it right. Anyway, go ahead and sign up. I
also created a survey to give us all a better sense of who's using SpamAssassin.
It's just 3 questions, all multiple choice :) -- if you have 3 se
I think it is just that simple. spamd is a very thin wrapper around the libs.
It more or less just takes the command line arguments and set options against
the libs from them. Very nice design, if I do say so myself.
C
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
MGF> Looking at spamd itself, it *looks* like all
I was just considering this myself. I will go set this up now, and announce it
on this list once it's up and ready for subscriptions.
C
Søren Boll Overgaard wrote:
SBO> Hello
SBO>
SBO> This subject may have been discussed earlier, if that is the case, I apologize
SBO> up front. I couldn't find
hi,
i was having great trouble getting whitelist_from to work correctly.
then i discovered what the problem was: i was using the -S option to
improve performance. doing so, however, also seems to completely
disable the whitelist feature. this is because, apparently, the
whitelist weighting is o
I think the problem is that you need a * before the @s
C
Ken Causey wrote:
KC> At a user's request I recently whitelisted
KC>
KC> whitelist_from @mailgeek.compgeeks.com
KC> whitelist_from @compgeeks.com
___
Have big pipes? SourceFor
On Sat, May 11, 2002 at 06:23:19PM +0200, Arpi wrote:
> Hi,
>
> > I will add the code to the CVS and put a mark that is still beta code.
>
> where should i send the updates later?
> i mean i see no sense of having it in your cvs, while the developed version
> is here...
Usually patches, so far,
How does one go about viewing the email addresses in the users whitelist? Is
there a utility to view this?
Jim
___
Have big pipes? SourceForge.net is looking for download mirrors. We supply
the hardware. You get the recognition. Ema
Hi,
> I will add the code to the CVS and put a mark that is still beta code.
where should i send the updates later?
i mean i see no sense of having it in your cvs, while the developed version
is here...
> If someone is decided to hack it a bit more, then they will be welcome
> to do it.
do you
On Sat, May 11, 2002 at 05:19:26PM +0200, Arpi wrote:
> Hi,
>
> as i said - it is not in usable form yet
> it's just the "core", no interfaces added yet
>
> anyway usage is simple:
> cat mail.txt | ./check
>
> it will print spam stats on it
OK.
I will add the code to the CVS and put a mark
SEE even the spam list flagged it!! I changed some text to resend.
-- Forwarded message --
Date: Sat, 11 May 2002 07:43:31 -0700
From: Mail Delivery System <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: *SPAM* Mail delivery failed: returning message to sender
SPAM: --
Hi,
> On Sat, 11 May 2002, Mail Admin wrote:
> > Hi, I want to use spamassassin on a system where real heavy load
> > exists. I have 540,000 incoming emails daily. I know spamc/spamd do
> > well under moderate load , but this is not enough. Did anybody think
> > of rewriting spammassasin in C,
>
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sat, 11 May 2002, Michael Moncur spake thusly:
> Same here. Appears to be a typo - here's the fix:
>
> Line 81:
> if ($self->{conf}->{check_mx_attempts) < 1) {
> Should be:
> if ($self->{conf}->{check_mx_attempts} < 1) {
I am not into perl i
Same here. Appears to be a typo - here's the fix:
Line 81:
if ($self->{conf}->{check_mx_attempts) < 1) {
Should be:
if ($self->{conf}->{check_mx_attempts} < 1) {
--
michael moncur mgm at starlingtech.com http://www.starlingtech.com/
"Research is the process of going up alleys to see if t
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Finding this when I start spamd:
Bareword "check_mx_attempts" not allowed while "strict subs" in use at
/usr/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.005/Mail/SpamAssassin/EvalTests.pm line 81.
Global symbol "$self" requires explicit package name at
/usr/lib/perl5/site
43 matches
Mail list logo
