i hope it's not too soon to ask about this again. i'm not quite sure
how to debug something like this when when it's --debug that is what
behaves differently :) i've put the commands and output into a pastebin
this time.
On 2014.12.03 05.45, Mark Martinec wrote:
listsb-spamassas...@bitrate.net wrote:
i was testing with a sample message, and noticed that when running
manually with --debug, there seem to be numerous differences in
the results, such as scores for the same tests differing, visual
ordering of results differing [is this significant?], and bayes not
being listed when using --debug. am i doing something wrong? are
my expectations misguided? i'm doing these tests as the user named
amavis, which the amavis software runs as.
spamassassin --test-mode --debug < message3.txt
1.6 RCVD_IN_BRBL_LASTEXT RBL: No description available.
[...]
spamassassin --test-mode < message3.txt
1.4 RCVD_IN_BRBL_LASTEXT RBL: No description available. [94.73.46.5
listed in bb.barracudacentral.org] -1.9 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayes spam
probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000]
Apparently in the first case a score set 1 was chosen, and in the
second case a score set 3. Availability of a bayes scanner choses
between the two.
i'm ignorant here - what is a score set? is there documentation i can
read up on?
Could it be that you have a fresh bayes database which had less than
200 spam and 200 ham entries in the first attempt, but became
populated and functional by the time of the second attempt?
i don't believe so - here's another exercise, with bayes info before and
after each test.
http://dpaste.com/3XFVPJT.txt
