"Tim Philip" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> I had hoped that someone who is cognizant of the various iterations of
> spamassassin might have instantly recognised that a FP FORGED_MUA_IMS is
> from a specific spamassassin version which I could then relate to the party
> who is asking me to fix our systems so that their Spamnix filter doesn't
> trap our mail as spam.

1. we don't know the Spamnix version number

and more importantly:

2. we don't know the mapping of Spamnix version number to SpamAssassin
   version number
3. we don't know what changes Spamnix has made
4. we don't have access to the Spamnix code
 
> If this is a time sink I'm sorry - I put a disclaimer at the start of
> my message that was meant to head your response off at the pass -
> maybe it was not phrased correctly. I am fishing in the hope that a
> knowledgable spamassassin expert may have come across this in the past

Of course not.  A SpamAssassin problem report is actually accompanied by
a version number and we have access to the code.  Debugging such issues
is easy.

> and can offer a simple explanation. I don't expect Spamnix
> configuration help. I thought that the people who subscribed to this
> list knew all things spamassassin.

Spamnix is not SpamAssassin, it's based on SpamAssassin.  Would you ask
BSD people to debug SunOS problems?  (Maybe you would.)  Your friend
should just contact Spamnix.  Think about it.  Say we figure it out: the
bug is still going to be in Spamnix and you might not be able to fix it
on your end.  And more people are going ask questions about closed
software here...

Other people seem to be willing to answer your question, though, so have
fun with the time sink.

Daniel

-- 
Daniel Quinlan
http://www.pathname.com/~quinlan/

Reply via email to