Re: Calling spamc and looping through files

2009-02-09 Thread Matus UHLAR - fantomas
On Sun, 2009-02-08 at 17:39 -0800, cnone wrote: Thank u very much.It works.By not accurate,you mean spam detection will not be accurate? On 09.02.09 03:50, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote: By accurate I mean -- SA can do a best effort guess. SA can not one hundred percent accurately identify

Re: Calling spamc and looping through files

2009-02-09 Thread cnone
I scanned over 2000 mails and it gave me score over 5.0 for all of them. Most of the scores were 5.4.Is there a way to change default threshold? By the way if the score is very higher than 5.0 like 8.0,does that mean it has the highest probability to be a spam? Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:

Re: Calling spamc and looping through files

2009-02-09 Thread Matus UHLAR - fantomas
On 09.02.09 03:54, cnone wrote: I scanned over 2000 mails and it gave me score over 5.0 for all of them. If they are not really spams, there is something broken in your configuration apparently Most of the scores were 5.4.Is there a way to change default threshold? By the way if the score is

Re: Humor? Attention, Bayes poison

2009-02-09 Thread Jeff Chan
On Sunday, February 8, 2009, 2:02:56 PM, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote: Just got this in an actual replica watch spam. This spam was sent using an innocent third party as the fake sender address who will pick up bounces and misdirected spam complaints. It went out via a third party host

Mail/SpamAssassin/CompiledRegexps/body_neg999.pm?

2009-02-09 Thread Michael Scheidell
not sure where this comes from? (!)_DIE: Can't locate Mail/SpamAssassin/CompiledRegexps/body_neg999.pm in @INC (@INC contains: /var/db/spamassassin/compiled/5.008/3.002005 /var/db/spamassassin/compiled/5.008/3.002005/auto lib /usr/local/lib/perl5/5.8.8/BSDPAN

Re: Humor? Attention, Bayes poison

2009-02-09 Thread Karsten Bräckelmann
On Mon, 2009-02-09 at 07:14 -0800, Jeff Chan wrote: On Sunday, February 8, 2009, 2:02:56 PM, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote: It was good for a laugh, really. :) Until a strange feeling crept over me, realizing the words... Confirmed. That paragraph *severely* affected Bayes for me. No Bayes

Re: Calling spamc and looping through files

2009-02-09 Thread Karsten Bräckelmann
On Mon, 2009-02-09 at 03:54 -0800, cnone wrote: I scanned over 2000 mails and it gave me score over 5.0 for all of them. Most of the scores were 5.4.Is there a way to change default threshold? By the Yes, there is. Mind having a look at your configuration? The default local.cf ships with a

Re: Calling spamc and looping through files

2009-02-09 Thread cnone
I found what is wrong.Thank u Karsten The problem was format of the email files. There are two extra headers in the beginning of the emails FROM: and RCPT TO:.So I removed all these headers and now spamassassin is doing its job which is excellent:) Karsten Bräckelmann-2 wrote: On Mon,

Completing SA Upgrade

2009-02-09 Thread Rich Shepard
I upgraded my server to Slackware-12.2 and perl-5.10.0 This meant building and installing the lastest SA, built against perl-5.10.0 rather than -5.8.8. So, SA-3.2.5 is installed, and several perl modules were upgraded from CPAN to accommodate it. However, ... ... the related sa-learn and

misc_10.cf

2009-02-09 Thread RobertH
is this the best example on the www for this file? http://spamassassin.apache.org/full/3.0.x/dist/rules/10_misc.cf or is there one more recent for 3.2.5 or newer? - rh

Re: misc_10.cf

2009-02-09 Thread Matt Kettler
RobertH wrote: is this the best example on the www for this file? http://spamassassin.apache.org/full/3.0.x/dist/rules/10_misc.cf or is there one more recent for 3.2.5 or newer? - rh Um, that's a file that comes with SA, and it is *NOT* user editable. Therefore, it's not an example,

RE: misc_10.cf

2009-02-09 Thread RobertH
Um, that's a file that comes with SA, and it is *NOT* user editable. Therefore, it's not an example, it is a standard config file that generates the default settings that you later over-ride with your local.cf. The 3.2.5 installation tarball will install the version of this file that

Re: misc_10.cf

2009-02-09 Thread Theo Van Dinter
10_misc.cf isn't in 3.2, 3.1 was the last version to have it. In 3.2 it's called 10_default_prefs.cf. You should have it installed in the default rules dir, probably /usr/share/spamassassin. And no, it's not editable. Or more specifically, you shouldn't edit it. On Mon, Feb 09, 2009 at

RE: misc_10.cf

2009-02-09 Thread RobertH
10_misc.cf isn't in 3.2, 3.1 was the last version to have it. In 3.2 it's called 10_default_prefs.cf. You should have it installed in the default rules dir, probably /usr/share/spamassassin. And no, it's not editable. Or more specifically, you shouldn't edit it. theo, thanks

Re: misc_10.cf

2009-02-09 Thread Matt Kettler
RobertH wrote: Um, that's a file that comes with SA, and it is *NOT* user editable. Therefore, it's not an example, it is a standard config file that generates the default settings that you later over-ride with your local.cf. The 3.2.5 installation tarball will install the version