I was referring to the fact that the newest "A" time is 20-something years in the future. Apparently, this is what is keeping it from expiring tokens.
Tim Gustafson MEI Technology Consulting, Inc [EMAIL PROTECTED] (516) 379-0001 Office (516) 480-1870 Mobile/Emergencies (516) 908-4185 Fax http://www.meitech.com/ -----Original Message----- From: Bill Landry [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, November 25, 2004 11:09 AM To: users@spamassassin.apache.org Subject: Re: sa-learn ham ----- Original Message ----- From: "Gustafson, Tim" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > I've attached the output of "sa-learn --force-expire -D" to this e-mail. > > Is there any way to "repair" this problem? I'd like to keep the > database since it's so incredibly effective right now. All looks fine here, what's the problem that you're referring to? If you are talking about the following lines: ===== Can't use estimation method for expiry, something fishy, calculating optimal atime delta (first pass) & couldn't find a good delta atime, need more token difference, skipping expire ===== that's normal when there is not enough token difference since the last expire to require another expire process to happen. Bill
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
