On Thursday, February 17, 2005, 6:45:58 AM, Juergen Georgi wrote:
Score set 3 - the fourth score - applies when Bayes is enabled and
network tests are enabled.
In addition, non-zero score set 3 values in 3.0.2 are much lower
than those in 2.64, e.g.
2.64: score SORTED_RECIPS 4.299 4.300
-Original Message-
From: Jeff Chan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, February 18, 2005 12:30 AM
To: SpamAssassin Users
Subject: Re: Less spam blocked with 3.02 - AWL-related?
On Thursday, February 17, 2005, 6:45:58 AM, Juergen Georgi wrote:
Score set 3 - the fourth score
On Mon 2005-02-14 (09:07), Johann Spies wrote:
On Fri, Feb 11, 2005 at 10:37:06AM -0500, Chris Santerre wrote:
[...]
Can we get the output from the spamassassin -D --lint please?
I should have read what you meant! Ok. Here it is ( have since added
a few more rules ) :
debug:
Thanks! I am learning every day.
Johann
--
Johann Spies Telefoon: 021-808 4036
Informasietegnologie, Universiteit van Stellenbosch
For by him were all things created, that are in
heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible,
whether they be thrones, or
On Fri, Feb 11, 2005 at 10:17:37AM -0500, Matt Kettler wrote:
I don't understand how you read that to think you should put a server IP
after test. Perhaps you should read it again, but this time realize that
the 13 servers in the description is a misnomer.
Clearly domain.tld should give
On Fri, Feb 11, 2005 at 10:37:06AM -0500, Chris Santerre wrote:
4) Can you share the output from a --lint with us?
$ spamassassin --lint
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$
What about spamassassin -D --lint?
Kind Regards,
Sander Holthaus
LOL, yeah I need to start typing exactly
On Mon, Feb 14, 2005 at 12:07:44PM +0100, Sander Holthaus - Orange XL wrote:
debug: diag: module installed: MIME::Base64, version 2.12
You should upgrade that one
This on a Debian Woody system. I have installed it from
www.backports.org and it is the latest one available for Debian.
I have installed them after visiting www.rulesemporium.com. It is not
easy to see there which rules will hit mor on spam and less on ham.
Yes it is. The rulesets that claim to be dangerous have a chance of hitting
more ham. Which is why they are dangerous.
In general, many rules comes in
On Thu, Feb 10, 2005 at 10:57:20AM -0500, Chris Santerre wrote:
1) Nice rulesets ;)
2) Please tell me you are using net-tests. SURBL? (might want to increase
those scores.)
Yes, I am using them and they appear regularly in the logs.
skip_rbl_checks 0
dns_available test: localhost
4) Can you share the output from a --lint with us?
$ spamassassin --lint
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$
What about spamassassin -D --lint?
Kind Regards,
Sander Holthaus
4) Can you share the output from a --lint with us?
$ spamassassin --lint
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$
What about spamassassin -D --lint?
Kind Regards,
Sander Holthaus
LOL, yeah I need to start typing exactly what I mean :)
Can we get the output from the spamassassin -D --lint please?
--Chris
I have upgraded spamassassin on three mail (2.63 - 3.02 on two and
2.64 - 3.02 on the other) servers about two weeks ago.
On the old system I have disabled AWL and Auto-learn because they
corrupted my bayesian database on at least one occasion.
I have decided to try out AWL with 3.02.
At first
-Original Message-
From: Johann Spies [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, February 10, 2005 2:20 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Less spam blocked with 3.02 - AWL-related?
I have upgraded spamassassin on three mail (2.63 - 3.02 on two and
2.64 - 3.02 on the other) servers
3) Stop using AWL. Seriously, I found it did more harm then
good and got big too fast.
I don't have any problem with it, and it is doing it's job quite well
actually. BUT I do think that it will only work if you have a good working
setup, in which there is a clear distinction in score's for
14 matches
Mail list logo
