RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude 3.0.5 Manual

Manual   http://shopping.declude.com/Version/Manuals/JunkMail/JM_3.0.5.asp David B www.declude.com   From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Geoff Varney Sent: Friday, September 08, 2006 2:49 PM To: declude.junkmail@declude.com Subject: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude

[Declude.JunkMail] Declude 3.0.5 Manual

Hi, Does anyone happen to have a copy of the “old” JunkMail 3.0.5 manual that they saved from the Web?  It used to be available here:   http://www.declude.com/Version/Manuals/JunkMail/JM_3.0.5.asp   Of course now it redirects you to the new “manual” area.  While the new one is OK, I re

RE: Re[6]: [Declude.JunkMail] Problems with SPAMC32 scoring??

Nope, I think I'll have to get on the SA list and see what I can find out. To be honest I am not sure what it was doing before my JM changes, but I know I was seeing a LOT more 10 scores. Thanks for your help. Geoff __ Geoff Varney Network Support Speci

RE: Re[2]: [Declude.JunkMail] Problems with SPAMC32 scoring??

gt; ERRORLEVEL: 1 > > SAMPLE-NONSPAM.TXT > ERRORLEVEL: 0 > > SAMPLE-SPAM.TXT > Scored 1001.1 > ERRORLEVEL: 0 > > This looks good. > > Geoff > > > __ > Geoff Varney > Network Support Specialist > Educatio

RE: Re[4]: [Declude.JunkMail] Problems with SPAMC32 scoring??

hat* looks better. Adding -et 10 gives ERRORLEVEL 10 on the one scoring 33... Geoff ______ Geoff Varney Network Support Specialist Educational Service District 112 Ridgefield School District 360-619-1405 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTE

RE: Re[2]: [Declude.JunkMail] Problems with SPAMC32 scoring??

\filters\SPAMC32\test.eml 5.1/5.0 ERRORLEVEL: 1 SAMPLE-NONSPAM.TXT ERRORLEVEL: 0 SAMPLE-SPAM.TXT Scored 1001.1 ERRORLEVEL: 0 This looks good. Geoff __ Geoff Varney Network Support Specialist Educational Service District 112 Ridgefield School District 360

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Problems with SPAMC32 scoring??

_SPAMASSASSIN_RULE Hmm... It appears this is at least partially on the SA side. Any ideas?? Thanks, Geoff -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Sanford Whiteman Sent: Thursday, April 27, 2006 10:31 AM To: Geoff Varney Subject: Re: [Declude.J

[Declude.JunkMail] Problems with SPAMC32 scoring??

Hello, Several months ago I got SPAMC32 working with my spamd server and reporting scores to Declude properly (as far as I know). With Sandy's help I set it up to use the following method: SA1 external 1 "c:\imail\declude\filters\spamc32\spamc32.exe -d -u spamd -p 783 -cw %WEIGHT% -s

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] SPAMC32 (SpamAssassin SPAMC for Declude) 0.5.58 released

Thanks Sandy. "Later in the week" was pretty soon! I have installed this and have been testing out the new functionality. One question I have is about checking for negative results that have a lt and an ht that are negative. In my early tests it appears that if I set up a few tests like this:

RE: Re[2]: [Declude.JunkMail] How to get negative rounded SA result usiing SPAMC32

Thanks Sandy. Believe me, I don't mind the wait. You definition of "wait" is not bad! This isn't an emergency anyway, just something I'm hoping to utilize to fine-tune things and make HAM results useful. Keep up the good work! Geoff ______

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] How to get negative rounded SA result usiing SPAMC32

If I can't get any better results with this, I'll see if Declude can help. Thanks, Geoff ______ Geoff Varney Network Support Specialist Educational Service District 112 Ridgefield School District 360-619-1405 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- F

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] How to get negative rounded SA result usiing SPAMC32

impossible or am I just messing up somewhere? Thanks, Geoff ______ Geoff Varney Network Administrator Ridgefield School District [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Geoff Varney Sent: Tuesday, January 03,

[Declude.JunkMail] How to get negative rounded SA result usiing SPAMC32

Hi, I recall that in the past few months I got some help from Sanford on getting SPAMC32 set up to report the rounded actual score to Declude and assign that many points to the score. Ie. if SA says 4.75 as a score, SPAMC32 reports 4 (or does it round up?) and then I have multiple lines in global.

[Declude.JunkMail] X-SPAM header for SpamAssassin using SPAMC32

Hi all, I now successfully have JunkMail using SPAMC32 to access a Linux spamd server for SPAM.  I am training the bayes database as the user that SPAMC32 is using to contact the spamd server.  However, in this setup I am not getting any subject line info (SPAM) or whatever I set u

RE: Re[2]: [Declude.JunkMail] SPAMC32 -e option in JunkMail

tance... Thanks for weighing in here with your suggestion. It's good to have people who create things around to help out with them! Geoff -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Sanford Whiteman Sent: Monday, October 24, 2005 3:50 PM To: Ge

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] SPAMC32 -e option in JunkMail

points. It is working for me quite well. Travis - Original Message - From: "Geoff Varney" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Monday, October 24, 2005 12:53 PM Subject: [Declude.JunkMail] SPAMC32 -e option in JunkMail > Hi, > I am finally getting SpamAssassin working for m

[Declude.JunkMail] SPAMC32 -e option in JunkMail

Hi, I am finally getting SpamAssassin working for my JunkMail with SPAMC32 (0.5.57) calling SPAMD from a Linux box. With training of the Bayesian databases well underway I am seeing significantly more SPAM being caught. However, I'd like to verify the way the SPAMASSASSIN entry in the Declude glob

[Declude.JunkMail] Problem with spamc32 to Linux spamd box

Hi all, I’m a Linux newbie, so I think this may have to do with that end of things, since I seem to have a problem there as well.   I have Redhat Fedora Core 3.  I have spamd running with –d to daemonize, –i to allow all IPs.  Even if I leave at the defaults and run it, spamc test on tha