SA 3.1.0 Compil failed ?

Hi when i want compile SA 3.1.0, i have a error in the test : t/reportheader..Not found: msgidnotvalid = Message-Id is not valid, # Failed test 6 in t/SATest.pm at line 592 Not found: spam-report-body = Spam detection software, running on the system " # Failed test 7

Re: Spamassassin and Mailing Lists

On Tuesday 29 November 2005 10:18 pm, Matt Kettler wrote: > At 10:34 PM 11/29/2005, Chris wrote: > >One of the mailing lists I belong to has since the 15th started using > > SA=20 3.0.4 and since then all pgp signatures have been as attachments > > instead of= =20 > >in-line as they were in previou

Re: Antidrug.cf deprecated and no longer maintained.

At 09:36 PM 11/29/2005, mouss wrote: it would be good to make the file empty, only containing this info. this way, even those who miss this message (and the previous one) still have a chance to get the info. Yes, but there are still users out there that aren't using SA 3.0.x due to perl versi

Re: Spamassassin and Mailing Lists

At 10:34 PM 11/29/2005, Chris wrote: One of the mailing lists I belong to has since the 15th started using SA=20 3.0.4 and since then all pgp signatures have been as attachments instead of= =20 in-line as they were in previous years. Is there a setting in SA that=20 could be causing this? No.

Re: OT? Threats from twtelecom over spam reports

On Tue, 29 Nov 2005, Chris wrote: On Tuesday 29 November 2005 8:26 pm, M. Lewis wrote: Chris, My opinion (opinions are like assholes, everyone has one and they all stink). 1. If the person was legit, he would *not* have responded harshly and 'threatened you' that things would get ugly. 2. There

FetchmailRC and Bayes

I’m running SA v 3.0.2 on Debian Woody.   Spamassassin –D –lint returns the following regarding Bayes:   debug: bayes: found bayes db version 3 debug: bayes: Not available for scanning, only 1 spam(s) in Bayes DB < 200   I have been running the following fetchmailrc against ham and s

Re: OT? Threats from twtelecom over spam reports

On Tuesday 29 November 2005 8:26 pm, M. Lewis wrote: > Chris, > > My opinion (opinions are like assholes, everyone has one and they all > stink). > > 1. If the person was legit, he would *not* have responded harshly and > 'threatened you' that things would get ugly. > > 2. There isn't squat he can

Spamassassin and Mailing Lists

One of the mailing lists I belong to has since the 15th started using SA 3.0.4 and since then all pgp signatures have been as attachments instead of in-line as they were in previous years. Is there a setting in SA that could be causing this? Today I finally got them to remove the x-no-archive

Re: Fetchmail and SA?

jdow a écrit : That's pretty much true. Although you can fake it with one master fetchmailrc with all the user accounts. I've not tried that, though. I do poll four accounts from the same .fetchmailrc, though. the netbsd pkgsrc (and I'm sure the freebsd port too) come with a rc script that do

Re: OT? Threats from twtelecom over spam reports

Ultimately twtelecom.net should be responsible. It's their customer they've allocated IP space for. Here is where the IP space was allocated to according to ARIN: http://ws.arin.net/whois/?queryinput=!%20NET-66-162-83-176-1 On Wednesday, November 30, 2005 at 2:09:20 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] confabul

Re: Antidrug.cf deprecated and no longer maintained.

Matt Kettler a écrit : Since a lot of people are still using antidrug.cf, I'm making a public announcement here to clarify. Antidrug.cf is deprecated and obsolete for all users of SpamAssassin 3.0.0 or higher. These rules are now a part of the standard SA distribution, and any improvements will

OT? Threats from twtelecom over spam reports

Since about the 22nd or 23nd I've been getting virus laden (Sober.U) spam from an address at twtelecom.net (66.162.83.190). All my spam reporting is done via two scripts, one is reporter.pl which runs sa-learn and reports to Razor, Pyzor and DCC. The other script, which was written by Karsten

Re: Spamd inscrutability. Does it ever look at a user_prefs file?

Ray Klassen wrote: > Spamassassin 3.04 with SQL support. > > I'm trying to set up a global textbased or MYSQL based whitelist. I want > to be able to support *wildcards* I am able to add specific addresses > to the AWL using spamassassin --add-addr-to-whitelist but when I've used > wildcards for

Spamd inscrutability. Does it ever look at a user_prefs file?

Spamassassin 3.04 with SQL support. I'm trying to set up a global textbased or MYSQL based whitelist. I want to be able to support *wildcards* I am able to add specific addresses to the AWL using spamassassin --add-addr-to-whitelist but when I've used wildcards for some of our desired senders, th

Re: Bayes feeding

Joe Zitnik wrote: > I apologize if this has been addressed before, but is there a consensus > on feeding bayes ham that is outbound from your organization? It seems > to make sense to me. You can almost guarantee the words bayes will be > "learning" are related to your organizations business func

Bayes feeding

I apologize if this has been addressed before, but is there a consensus on feeding bayes ham that is outbound from your organization?  It seems to make sense to me.  You can almost guarantee the words bayes will be "learning" are related to your organizations business function.  Even if they are p

Re: spamassassin --D lint failing?

Leonard SA wrote: > Hello, > > Thats the funny thing.. i dont have any spaces.. but since i went into > v310.pre .. i dont get the errors anymore and the test is now error free .. > > Thanks.. > > BTW .. how can i check to see if DCC and razor are working? You can run a spamassassin --lint -D..

Re: spamassassin --D lint failing?

Hello, Thats the funny thing.. i dont have any spaces.. but since i went into v310.pre .. i dont get the errors anymore and the test is now error free .. Thanks.. BTW .. how can i check to see if DCC and razor are working? i thought they were.. but now since i got bayes to start working toda

Re: spamassassin --D lint failing?

Leonard SA wrote: > Hello List .. > > For some odd reason everytime I restart spamd or run spamassassin --D > lint ; I get some odd parse errors. > > ### > [25084] warn: config: failed to parse, now a plugin, skipping: > ok_languages_all > [25084] warn: config: failed to parse lin

spamassassin --D lint failing?

Hello List .. For some odd reason everytime I restart spamd or run spamassassin --D lint ; I get some odd parse errors. ### [25084] warn: config: failed to parse, now a plugin, skipping: ok_languages_all [25084] warn: config: failed to parse line, skipping: use_dcc_1 [25084]

Re: sa-update

On Tue, Nov 29, 2005 at 11:24:28AM -0800, Mike Jackson wrote: > Thanks to another thread today, I discovered the sa-update script (which > must be new, or I haven't noticed it in 3+ years of using SA). However, It's new with 3.1. > when I try to run it on two separate boxes, I get debug output

sa-update

Thanks to another thread today, I discovered the sa-update script (which must be new, or I haven't noticed it in 3+ years of using SA). However, when I try to run it on two separate boxes, I get debug output similar to this (when invoked with no command line options other than -D): [8348] dbg:

Re: 3.1: config: not parsing, administrator setting: loadplugin Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::SPF

Thomas Mueller wrote: > Matt Kettler wrote: > >>At 02:39 AM 11/29/2005, Thomas Mueller wrote: >> >> >>>I don't have any user_prefs files, only the global one. >> >>eh? What "global one"? > > > I don't have any local user, because of that I was sure there is no > $HOME/.spamassassin/user_prefs an

Re: Best choice for more stop spams ? I wait your return

Noc Phibee wrote: > very Thanks all for answer ... > > they have a big difference from 3.1.0 with 3.0.4 ? RBLs are more efficient in 3.1.0 and higher. There's also been some rule tweaking. Also, from reviewing the STATISTICS-*.txt files I feel that 3.1.0 had a cleaner mass-check than 3.0.0 did,

Re: 3.1: config: not parsing, administrator setting: loadplugin Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::SPF

Matt Kettler wrote: > At 02:39 AM 11/29/2005, Thomas Mueller wrote: > >> I don't have any user_prefs files, only the global one. > > eh? What "global one"? I don't have any local user, because of that I was sure there is no $HOME/.spamassassin/user_prefs and all configuration is done in /etc/spa

Re: Installing SpamAssassin on OS X 10.3.9 Server

At 09:05 AM 11/29/2005, you wrote: Hi I have been trying to install SA on an OS X 10.3.9 Server using CPAN. I am following instructions from http://developer.apple.com/server/ fighting_spam.html I have SA running on my OS/X box (10.4). From what I recall, I compiled from source, so

Installing SpamAssassin on OS X 10.3.9 Server

Hi I have been trying to install SA on an OS X 10.3.9 Server using CPAN. I am following instructions from http://developer.apple.com/server/ fighting_spam.html In CPAN I have typed install Mail::SpamAssassin It goes through a bunch of things, and then asks me for the psotmas

Re: Best choice for more stop spams ? I wait your return

very Thanks all for answer ... they have a big difference from 3.1.0 with 3.0.4 ? No "specifique" problems when we upgrade 3.0.4 to 3.1.0 ? Thanks Matt Kettler a écrit : At 07:48 AM 11/29/2005, Noc Phibee wrote: Hi, I want post you my config ;=) i have a small problems: I am thinks that

Antidrug.cf deprecated and no longer maintained.

Since a lot of people are still using antidrug.cf, I'm making a public announcement here to clarify. Antidrug.cf is deprecated and obsolete for all users of SpamAssassin 3.0.0 or higher. These rules are now a part of the standard SA distribution, and any improvements will likely happen directly in

Re: 3.1: config: not parsing, administrator setting: loadplugin Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::SPF

At 02:39 AM 11/29/2005, Thomas Mueller wrote: I don't have any user_prefs files, only the global one. eh? What "global one"? I'd still strongly suggest removing them from *.pre and see if you still get the warning. That's a sure-fire way to prove those statements exist somewhere else, somewh

Re: Best choice for more stop spams ? I wait your return

At 07:48 AM 11/29/2005, Noc Phibee wrote: Hi, I want post you my config ;=) i have a small problems: I am thinks that i don't have a good result in scoring. a big quantity of spams are not detected. My server is not a mail server, but only a relay. He run on Qmail with Qmail-scanner and s

Re: Spamassassin learning

At 04:31 AM 11/29/2005, Kryol wrote: I have a following strings in a local.cf: use_bayes 1 bayes_path /usr/local/mail/spamassassin/bayes bayes_auto_learn 0 I used: sa-learn --spam --showdots --mbox - about 1200 spam messages sa-learn --ham --showdots --mbox - about 300 ham messages I see:

Re: Fetchmail and SA?

Thanks! So I notice a fetchmailrc file is required in each persons "home directory". But their maildir is in their vpopmail folder in the home folder. I will keep reading to see if they explain that. I just want a person to login and be able to setup fetchmail files for each external account. I

Spamassassin learning

Hi all, I have a problem with a Bayes. I have a following strings in a local.cf: use_bayes 1 bayes_path /usr/local/mail/spamassassin/bayes bayes_auto_learn 0 I used: sa-learn --spam --showdots --mbox - about 1200 spam messages sa-learn --ham --showdots --mbox - about 300 ham me

Re: 3.1: config: not parsing, administrator setting: loadplugin Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::SPF

Matt Kettler wrote: > At 05:14 PM 11/28/2005, Thomas Mueller wrote: >> The failing plugins are: >> Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::URIDNSBL >> Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::Hashcash >> Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::SPF > > Note that these messages don't by themselves mean the plugin isn't > loading. They

Re: some messages bypassing spamassasin

From: "Toni Casueps" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> There are a few messages that don't have the X-Spam... headers. Is there any conditions under which a message doesn't get checked? I use Spamassassin 3.0.4 under Linux+Postfix I am invoking it from master.cf (i.e. the IntegratedSpamdInPostfix article o

some messages bypassing spamassasin

There are a few messages that don't have the X-Spam... headers. Is there any conditions under which a message doesn't get checked? I use Spamassassin 3.0.4 under Linux+Postfix I am invoking it from master.cf (i.e. the IntegratedSpamdInPostfix article of the wiki)