Also, I would add the path to your auto-whitelist file
by adding this to your local.cf:
auto_whitelist_path /home/spam/.spamassassin/auto-whitelist
On Mon, May 22, 2006 at 09:07:48AM -1000, Chan, Wilson wrote:
That seemed to fix it. I guess the default is to create a prefs path.
Thanks!
I think I'm dealing with a similar situation. Here's what you could try.
Forget about changing the user that spamd runs as. The fact that it
falls back to nobody maybe ok. Say your tokens are located in
/home/admin/.spamassassin. Open /etc/spamassassin/local.cf and put these
two lines in there:
Hello,
I started piping my mail through SA a couple of months ago and I've
been diligently marking messages as spam for the bayes subsystem. Then I
noticed that neither the headers of messages nor the analysis reports
have anything about bayes rules.
I'm running exim and here's what I have in
Consider 3 months (better: 1 month) for spam, 6 months for ham.
Thanks! I thought nobody would reply! I know what to do now.
is that one enjoys several times the
same good things for the first time.
Friedrich Nietzsche
On Apr 10, 2006, at 8:59 PM, Sergei Gerasenko wrote:
Thanks for such a quick reply. So upgrading would really be
helpful in
terms of performance if nothing else. Ok, I'll give it a thought.
Maybe
I just downloaded antidrug.cf from drugemporium and dropped it in the
rules directory. spamassassin -D says that it's reading it but running a
drug message through doesn't trigger the rules. Should I rename
antidrug.cf to say 35_antidrug.cf or it doesn't matter? Is there anyway
I can test the
antidrug.cf is unnecessary on SA 3.0.0 and higher. The rules have
been incorporated into the default set. Your drug message probably
doesn't trigger any of the rules. Take a look at the file and see
what it is looking for.
Cool! Thank you!
Hello everybody,
Got a potentially previously answered question. I have spamassassin
3.0.2-3, which is the current release with Debian. I wouldn't like to
deviate from the official package and so I'm wondering if it's
absolutely necessary to upgrade. I diffed the rules, they seem to be the
same.
Kettler wrote:
Sergei Gerasenko wrote:
Hello everybody,
Got a potentially previously answered question. I have spamassassin
3.0.2-3, which is the current release with Debian. I wouldn't like to
deviate from the official package and so I'm wondering if it's
absolutely necessary to upgrade. I
Side-note.. what version of SA did you diff against?
I downloaded Mail-SpamAssassin-current from the ftp. I thought that was
a link to the most current version. I might have been wrong.
All that said, you might be OK with debian's SA 3.0.2-3. While it's
important to be fairly current on SA,
10 matches
Mail list logo
