for each user or domain? However, the other domains seem
to be working ok.
In /etc/mail/spamassassin/ I have "use_bayes 1"
Perhaps someone could spot something I've missed for me? Meanwhile, I'll go
and study the wiki some more. Thanks.
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/bayes-not-active-although-enabled--tp24663548p24672500.html
Sent from the SpamAssassin - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
ew this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/bayes-not-active-although-enabled--tp24663548p24668896.html
Sent from the SpamAssassin - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>> Benny Pedersen wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sun, July 26, 2009 15:29, snowweb wrote:
>>>
0.000 0258 0 non-token data:
nspam
0.000 0160 0 non-token data:
nham
>>>
>>> try to have them more or less equal to have good bayes
>>>
> Benny Pedersen wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Sun, July 26, 2009 15:29, snowweb wrote:
>>
>>> 0.000 0258 0 non-token data:
>>> nspam
>>> 0.000 0160 0 non-token data:
>>> nham
>>
>> try to have them more or less equal to have good bayes db
>>
>> so
o, score=3.0 required=4.7 tests=RELAYCOUNTRY_US autolearn=no
version=3.2.4
X-Spam-Report:
* 3.0 RELAYCOUNTRY_US Relayed through United States of America
* 0.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message
X-Spam-Relay-Country: US US US US US US US US US
This is not a random event. Bayes is not b
On Sun, July 26, 2009 15:29, snowweb wrote:
> 0.000 0258 0 non-token data: nspam
> 0.000 0160 0 non-token data: nham
try to have them more or less equal to have good bayes db
so if less then 1000 in diff is fine
if more then 1000 adjust lea
data: last expiry atime
0.000 0 0 0 non-token data: last expire atime
delta
0.000 0 0 0 non-token data: last expire
reduction count
I see from that, that I've not trained as many HAM as I thought! OK, I'm off
in search of some
On Sun, July 26, 2009 15:10, snowweb wrote:
> Sorry Benny, my message wasn't very clear (although your information was
> interesting). However, my main concern is that it is not using bayes to
> analyse the messages, let alone to learn from them.
sa-learn --dump magic
> I've now trained bayes wi
ng bayes to
analyse the messages, let alone to learn from them.
I've now trained bayes with well over 200 mails, using sa-learn but I'm
wondering if the parameters you mentions prevent it from learning even when
using sa-learn since it still has not kicked in?
--
View this message in co
On Sun, July 26, 2009 04:43, snowweb wrote:
>
> In /etc/mail/spamassassin/local.cf
>
> bayes_auto_learn 1
>
> But when I examine the message headers,
>
> X-Spam-Status: No, score=3.0 required=4.7
> tests=ALL_TRUSTED,AWL,HTML_MESSAGE,
> MIME_HTML_ONLY,TVD_RCVD_IP autolearn=no version=3.2.4
snowweb wrote:
> Sorry, got mixed up. In /etc/mail/spamassassin/local.cf
>
> use_bayes 1
>
> Is there anywhere else that I need to switch this on since it does not
> appear to be doing bayesian testing at all for any messages.
>
>
check your sa-learn --dump magic
SA won't activate bayes until i
Sorry, got mixed up. In /etc/mail/spamassassin/local.cf
use_bayes 1
Is there anywhere else that I need to switch this on since it does not
appear to be doing bayesian testing at all for any messages.
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/bayes-not-active-although-enabled
?
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/bayes-not-active-although-enabled--tp24663548p24663548.html
Sent from the SpamAssassin - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
13 matches
Mail list logo
