http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3939
Summary: Crash when reporting spam
Product: Spamassassin
Version: 3.0.1
Platform: Other
OS/Version: OpenBSD
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3937
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-29 11:55 ---
Subject: Re: Win32 removes all PATH entries
On Fri, Oct 29, 2004 at 04:46:00AM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If this is due to Fat32, I might suggest closing
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3940
Summary: ArchiveIterator uses opt_j for two different things
Product: Spamassassin
Version: SVN Trunk (Latest Devel Version)
Platform: Other
OS/Version: other
Status: NEW
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3940
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|Future |3.1.0
--- You are
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3941
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |trivial
Target Milestone|Future
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3937
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-29 12:50 ---
I think it should be pretty easy to turn off those taint checks on windows.
FAT32 is still commonly used in a lot of win32 setups AFAIK...
--- You are
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3937
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-29 12:54 ---
Ok I didn't know I had to modify the spamassassin.bat file to include the -T
switch for perl to use taint mode. (should taint be on by default?)
Now I can
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3937
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-29 14:02 ---
Subject: Re: Win32 removes all PATH entries
On Fri, Oct 29, 2004 at 01:51:21PM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Theo: Spamassassin.bat is created by make
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3938
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3937
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-29 15:14 ---
In unix the spamassasin file can be installed as a perl source file with
#!/usr/bin/perl -T -w as the first line. Windows command processor doesn't use
that.
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3930
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-29 19:25 ---
Correction -- I forgot that I had not run make test since applying and trying
out the patch. This is from nmake test under Win32:
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3930
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-29 20:35 ---
Subject: Re: [review] URIDNSBL plugin does not honor config option to limit
URLs.
On Fri, Oct 29, 2004 at 07:34:25PM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
OK, -1 on
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3930
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #2494 is|0 |1
obsolete|
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3941
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-29 21:44 ---
Created an attachment (id=2499)
-- (http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/attachment.cgi?id=2499action=view)
suggested patch
--- You are receiving this mail
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3941
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|Spamcop now limits reports |[review] Spamcop now limits
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3930
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-30 03:02 ---
Sorry for not noticing thatthe make test faiolure was not the resuolt of the
patch.
Tested the new patch in trunk and 3.0.2 branch.
+1 for the new patch
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3924
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3924
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-30 04:40 ---
I confirmed the bug in the latest ActivePerl 5.8.4 and reported it to them in
http://bugs.activestate.com/show_bug.cgi?id=34726
--- You are receiving this
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3942
Summary: Small Bug in EvalTests
Product: Spamassassin
Version: 3.0.0
Platform: All
OS/Version: other
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P5
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3942
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |trivial
Summary|Small
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3943
Summary: Problem in all_from_addrs
Product: Spamassassin
Version: 3.0.0
Platform: Other
OS/Version: other
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P5
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3851
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-31 01:41 ---
How about simply removing the rule which checks the Message-ID if the Client is
a Netscape Messager?
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3929
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #2490 is|0 |1
obsolete|
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3930
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-31 12:05 ---
+1 . I was wondering what Sidney was talking about ;)
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3930
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3924
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3931
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3936
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-31 14:25 ---
Subject: Re: New: ArchiveIterator uses opt_n for two different things
I've enabled -n in my nightly mass-check runs for non-Bayes, because
the sorting is
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3940
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-31 14:27 ---
Subject: Re: New: ArchiveIterator uses opt_j for two different things
I'd like to break those two apart, and keep opt_j as a backward
compatibility option.
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3936
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-31 14:55 ---
Subject: Re: ArchiveIterator uses opt_n for two different things
On Sun, Oct 31, 2004 at 02:25:04PM -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I've enabled -n in my
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3940
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-31 14:57 ---
Subject: Re: ArchiveIterator uses opt_j for two different things
On Sun, Oct 31, 2004 at 02:27:17PM -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'd strongly prefer (I'm
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3917
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-31 15:23 ---
I found the firewall that was holding up my testing -- remnant of a VPN client I
had been using -- and captured the traffic from a test with spamc on a linux box
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3936
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-31 15:54 ---
It's whatever order the message path(s) are passed to AI.
actually that's not 100% true -- it's ordered spam, then ham, in whatever order
the message path(s) are
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3936
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3940
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-31 16:25 ---
Subject: Re: ArchiveIterator uses opt_j for two different things
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I'd strongly prefer (I'm probably -1 on
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3940
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-31 17:57 ---
Subject: Re: ArchiveIterator uses opt_j for two different things
Well, jobs would be the appropriate option name following make,
here. (I do try to use the GNU
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3771
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #2478 is|0 |1
obsolete|
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3771
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-31 20:04 ---
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL Specific Bayes Storage Module
BTW, anyone who wants, feel free to step in and find why there is
different data between runs. The only
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3917
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-11-01 10:39 ---
I have a workaround that tests ok, but I am not submitting a patch because I
don't think it is a workable solution. Instead I'm putting it in this comment in
the
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3814
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-11-01 11:14 ---
for people reading this bug, you might want to read bug 3406 since ALL_TRUSTED
is directly releated to trusted_networks.
--- You are receiving this mail
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3406
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3814
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3917
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-11-01 11:36 ---
Do you think this workaround will make it into the official Spam-Assassin
Build. And If so how would I know when it is there, other that looking at the
code
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3917
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-11-01 12:14 ---
It's probably ok to slow down scanning on Cygwin only.
I'll see about putting together a standalone test for a Cygwin bug report. That
will do two other things
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3917
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-11-01 12:30 ---
I just wanted to let everyone know that I have see the error with files as
small as 8K. What you may want try is to break the message response string
into
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3917
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-11-01 13:26 ---
Also could you give a little more detail on where to place the new code.
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the assignee for the bug,
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3917
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-11-01 14:09 ---
Subject: Re: SpamC is reporting failed sanity check on some messages
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Does sleep() allow fractional seconds in
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3917
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-11-01 15:13 ---
Just as long as the packets are not fragmented,
might be enough to keep the problem from occuring
I'll have to try that. If nothing else, the implied flush
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3917
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-11-01 17:44 ---
Subject: Re: SpamC is reporting failed sanity check on some
messages
From the MS socket documentation:
The semantics of closesocket are affected by the socket
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3917
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-11-01 18:57 ---
Loren, thanks, it looked promising, but adding a call to shutdown before the
close did not help :-(
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3944
Summary: get_envelope_from not handling received header
Product: Spamassassin
Version: 3.0.1
Platform: Other
OS/Version: FreeBSD
Status: NEW
Severity: major
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3917
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-11-02 00:58 ---
Subject: Re: SpamC is reporting failed sanity check on some messages
I was more thinking of making sure that SO_LINGER is set correctly. This
really sounds
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3917
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-11-02 04:16 ---
sleep(5) between the call to shutdown and the close doesn't help at all.
I added a -l option to the call to spamc -x to see the error. Tthe results are
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3917
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-11-02 04:28 ---
Subject: Re: SpamC is reporting failed sanity check on some messages
But here's kicker. I tested using the first 39166 bytes of the message of
the
first test.
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3945
Summary: HITS replacement is no longer sortable
Product: Spamassassin
Version: 3.0.1
Platform: All
OS/Version: All
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3945
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3225
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-11-02 08:55 ---
Subject: Re: RFE: Bayes optimizations
Indeed, after a little analysis it looks like we might come out ahead
(by reducing the number of queries by half or more)
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3946
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3945
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-11-02 09:42 ---
Subject: Re: HITS replacement is no longer sortable
On Tue, Nov 02, 2004 at 08:55:18AM -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
steve: thanks for the dup pointer! :)
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3947
Summary: SPF failure scores too low
Product: Spamassassin
Version: 3.0.1
Platform: Other
OS/Version: other
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P5
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3917
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-11-02 09:53 ---
hm
have you guys got virus scanners installed? might they do something to bad
content being sent over 127.0.0.1?
--- You are receiving this mail
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3917
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-11-02 10:30 ---
I did recently install XP Service pack 2 and it has been interacting badly with
lots of things... How about if I format my disk, install linux and see how
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3917
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-11-02 10:41 ---
Is XP SP2 Firewall enabled?
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3946
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-11-02 10:41 ---
Subject: Re: I need to be able to send email.
On Tue, Nov 02, 2004 at 10:29:43AM -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Start by attaching a copy of one of these
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3946
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-11-02 10:45 ---
Excuse me? So it's wrong for me to attempt to help this poor fella out by
telling him the proper way to ask for help?
Sure he might have a problem with some
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3648
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-11-02 10:53 ---
Bob,
Either this issue has already been resolved or I am unable to reproduce the
error. Using notepad I created a new file with just 1 rule linted and no
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3946
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-11-02 10:57 ---
Subject: Re: I need to be able to send email.
On Tue, Nov 02, 2004 at 10:45:32AM -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Excuse me? So it's wrong for me to attempt to
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3946
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-11-02 11:57 ---
Fred, thanks for helping out. With bug reports similar to this one,
sometimes it is appropriate to redirect people to the mailing list
for help. It would also
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3828
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-11-02 12:33 ---
quick note that i'm seeing on this patch. a low timeout (ie 1-90 seconds) will
timeout a child running a bayes auto-expire almost every time since the auto-
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3648
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-11-02 18:38 ---
Subject: Re: --lint errors when valid rule is at very end of file
On Tue, Nov 02, 2004 at 06:35:33PM -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Interestingly, the
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3648
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-11-02 18:45 ---
Created an attachment (id=2504)
-- (http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/attachment.cgi?id=2504action=view)
suggested patch
this is pretty trivial...
--- You
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2991
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--- You
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3948
Summary: spamcop submissions don't seem to work
Product: Spamassassin
Version: 3.0.0
Platform: Other
URL: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=279430
OS/Version:
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3236
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-11-02 21:51 ---
the same applies for the webmail client IMP (www.horde.org). Can you extend this
patch to work with IMP too?
--- You are receiving this mail because:
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3828
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-11-03 05:17 ---
Setting the tcp and child timouts to 10 seems to have solved the problem
(thanks to [EMAIL PROTECTED] for pointing this out), and that seems to have
solved
the
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3600
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-11-04 06:03 ---
Guys, I'd like to politely suggest that this be moved to 3.0.2.
There's a lot of complaints on the talk list which seem to boil down to lack of
received: path
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3949
Summary: ALL_TRUSTED misfires when Received: parsing fails.
Product: Spamassassin
Version: 3.0.1
Platform: All
OS/Version: All
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3600
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-11-04 06:28 ---
Let me second this. The lack of a better Received line parser is a major
problem
of SpamAssassin which needs to be solved soonest possible.
--- You are
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3600
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|3.1.0 |3.0.2
--- Additional
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3225
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-11-04 10:32 ---
Subject: Re: RFE: Bayes optimizations
Interestingly enough, I don't see this same speedup. I see about 1%
in one part of my benchmark (scanning via
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3950
Summary: Exim $sender_fullhost not recognised by Received header
parser
Product: Spamassassin
Version: 3.0.1
Platform: Other
OS/Version: other
Status: NEW
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3950
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|Future |3.0.2
--- You are
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3949
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-11-04 10:43 ---
ok. perhaps this isn't such a bad idea, when weighed against the FPs... I'm
coming around to the idea. anyone else?
--- You are receiving this mail
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3950
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-11-04 10:56 ---
Subject: Re: New: Exim $sender_fullhost not recognised by Received
header parser
On Thu, 4 Nov 2004 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Received: from
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3950
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-11-04 11:12 ---
It may be against 821 and possibly also 2821, but if Exim does do it, we will
probably have to support it anyway. it wouldn't be the first anti-standard
thing
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3950
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-11-04 11:20 ---
Subject: Re: Exim $sender_fullhost not recognised by Received
header parser
Exim doesn't do it by deafult. As I said, it's a misconfiguration,
breakage caused
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3949
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-11-04 11:23 ---
Subject: Re: ALL_TRUSTED misfires when Received: parsing fails.
On Thu, Nov 04, 2004 at 10:43:50AM -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
ok. perhaps this isn't such
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3951
Summary: Possible tok_get_all optimization
Product: Spamassassin
Version: SVN Trunk (Latest Devel Version)
Platform: Other
OS/Version: other
Status: NEW
Severity:
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3951
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--- You
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3600
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-11-04 12:23 ---
Created an attachment (id=2505)
-- (http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/attachment.cgi?id=2505action=view)
Example spam that triggers ALL_TRUSTED
This is a sample
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3949
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-11-04 13:22 ---
As for Justin's local, no relay situation, one could always implement a
separate no_relays eval test that matches when both fields are 0, and set up a
rule for it
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3949
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-11-04 18:51 ---
Created an attachment (id=2506)
-- (http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/attachment.cgi?id=2506action=view)
suggested patch
implements the only and at least 1
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3949
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|ALL_TRUSTED misfires when |[review] ALL_TRUSTED
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3951
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-11-04 19:22 ---
The 57% time decrease I saw was for the tok_get_all sub itself, not an overall
decrease.
I'm assuming that the bayes routines run simultaneously with other
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3951
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-11-04 20:10 ---
Subject: Re: Possible tok_get_all optimization
Don't get me wrong, I'm all for lowering the number of queries and
agree that it will help. My benchmark
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3951
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-11-04 20:33 ---
Regarding bunch size optimization, I don't think it would ever turn out to be
the best solution due to the varied nature of different people's email paths
(and
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3869
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-11-04 20:55 ---
my current plan to fix it, btw, is to simply have the plugins push stuff into
the conf array and avoid the whole plugin call/inhibit callback business
whenever
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3654
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3949
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-11-04 22:14 ---
I'm -0.5 on this change for both trunk and 3.0 branch.
If there really are _no_ Received: headers, then the message should be
trusted, so an exemption should be
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3600
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-11-05 09:16 ---
Heiko sent me a note with Exim headers in it... After some digging I found
that the Exim stuff has a
specific section in the parser, none of which match the
1101 - 1200 of 34460 matches
Mail list logo
