On Tuesday 19 June 2007 4:44 am, Duane Hill wrote:
> On Mon, 18 Jun 2007, Chris wrote:
> > I happened to notice that I had the above plugin uncommented in v312.pre
> > and v320.pre. I haven't noticed any problems but could this cause the
> > plugin to be loaded twice?
>
> I have SA v3.2 running her
On Tue, Jun 19, 2007 at 05:02:28PM -0700, John D. Hardin wrote:
> Q'n'D: look at what a Received: header generated by your box for an
> authenticated client looks like, and write a header rule to match it,
> and score that rule -20 or so.
Even better: set that rule to shortcircuit.
Best: config
On Tue, 19 Jun 2007, Bazooka Joe wrote:
> fc4, sendmail, sa 3.0.6, spamass-milter
>
> some clients get mail rejected from my server (which they are using to
> send) because sa is checking all mail. I use smtp auth - Is there any
> way to bypass SA if they have been authenticated?
Q'n'D: look at
fc4, sendmail, sa 3.0.6, spamass-milter
some clients get mail rejected from my server (which they are using to
send) because sa is checking all mail. I use smtp auth - Is there any
way to bypass SA if they have been authenticated?
> On Tue, 2007-06-19 at 18:03 +, Duane Hill wrote:
> > On Tue, 19 Jun 2007, Robert Fitzpatrick wrote:
> > > Can someone tell me for sure which way this needs to be
> and how to get
> > > sa-update to look at /usr/local/share/spamassassin again
> if that is what
> > > I need to do?
> >
> > I'm u
On Tue, 19 Jun 2007, Robert Fitzpatrick wrote:
On Tue, 2007-06-19 at 18:03 +, Duane Hill wrote:
On Tue, 19 Jun 2007, Robert Fitzpatrick wrote:
Can someone tell me for sure which way this needs to be and how to get
sa-update to look at /usr/local/share/spamassassin again if that is what
I n
So, I should move my core rules to /var/db/spamassassin/the_version
after setting up SA from the ports system? The issue is debug does not
seem to find my core rules under /usr/share, there is no mention of them
in the debug output.
--
Robert
No. Once sa-update has updated /var/db/spamassassin
On Tue, 2007-06-19 at 18:03 +, Duane Hill wrote:
> On Tue, 19 Jun 2007, Robert Fitzpatrick wrote:
> > Can someone tell me for sure which way this needs to be and how to get
> > sa-update to look at /usr/local/share/spamassassin again if that is what
> > I need to do?
>
> I'm using FreeBSD here
On Tue, 19 Jun 2007, Robert Fitzpatrick wrote:
From the beginning I have used /usr/local/share/spamassassin for the .cf
files as this is how the ports system sets up SA on our FreeBSD system.
Sometime ago, someone posted a response to an issue I had at the time
with rules firing that I should b
>From the beginning I have used /usr/local/share/spamassassin for the .cf
files as this is how the ports system sets up SA on our FreeBSD system.
Sometime ago, someone posted a response to an issue I had at the time
with rules firing that I should be using the
default /var/db/spamassassin/ and I wa
John Rudd wrote:
If you're going to do this, I would suggest that instead of counting
to X hits on your low priority MX's and then blacklisting the IP, do
this:
Count on all of your MX's, and look for a ratio between "hits on low
priority MX's and hits on high priority MX's".
IFF the hi
I'd like to see a feature on FuzzyOCR to cap the points it adds. Sometimes
it really goes wildwhere it's a false positive and adds over 40 points. I'd
like to cap it at 8 or so.
You can use a hack in the mean time:
http://www200.pair.com/mecham/spam/capFuzzy.txt
Gary V
I'd like to see a feature on FuzzyOCR to cap the points it adds.
Sometimes it really goes wildwhere it's a false positive and adds over
40 points. I'd like to cap it at 8 or so.
I install SA via cpan, so bug 5010 was there preventing it.
I tried two cases on separate machines.
1st one I hit ctrl-C while in testing phase, closed cpan shell, and went to
.cpan/build/SpamAssassin* directory. Changed the ownership of all file to -R
spam:spam which is an ordinary user there
This is just FYI. I just upgraded SA from 3.2.0 to 3.2.1 using FreeBSD's
portupgrade tool and I have not seen any issues.
I also noticed re2c went from 0.12.0 to 0.12.1. That upgraded as well
without any issues.
After upgrading both, I re-ran sa-compile and restarted the spamd daemon.
Ever
Please note that of course, I can only speak for myself and the
system I am responsible for. I really don't know if netzero.com
uses a similar system or not. I have no idea what basis their
blocking has, nor do I know whether it's in any way sensible or not.
Granted, but it seems to me that
Rarely hear from this utility since it only kicks in for marginal cases. This
is what I got yesterday:
Jun 18 22:55:53 d_baron spamd[5673]: FuzzyOcr: Errors in Scanset "ocrad"
Jun 18 22:55:53 d_baron spamd[5673]: FuzzyOcr: Return code: 512, Error: ocrad:
maxval > 255 in ppm "P6" file.
Jun 18 22:
On Mon, 18 Jun 2007, Chris wrote:
I happened to notice that I had the above plugin uncommented in v312.pre and
v320.pre. I haven't noticed any problems but could this cause the plugin to
be loaded twice?
I have SA v3.2 running here and only show ImageInfo in v320.pre. I would
think you would
18 matches
Mail list logo
