On Tue Feb 02 2016 09:36:12 Martin Gregorie <mar...@gregorie.org> said:
>
> On Tue, 2016-02-02 at 09:10 -0700, @lbutlr wrote:
>> When a user moves a message from the spam box to the not spam box i
>> have a script that learns that message as ham, however, the user
>> would like it if the tagging of the message was removed in the
>> process.
>>
> I do something similar when I add spam to my spam corpus. I use this
> gawk script to do the job:
>
> gawk '
> BEGIN { act = "copy";
> body = "no";
> }
> /^[A-Za-z]/ { act = "copy" }
> /^X-Spam/ { act = "skip" }
> /^$/ { body = "yes"; }
> {
> if (act == "copy" || body == "yes")
> { print }
> }
> ' <$1 >temp.txt
>
> It is driven by a bash script that accepts the names or one or more
> message files as its arguments and runs each message through gawk.
>
> To use it, I first copy the message(s) into my spam collection
> directory and then run this script, which replaces each named spam
> message with a version that has been stripped of its X-Spam headers.
>
> I've omitted the enclosing bash script because you'll probably want
> something quite different, but hopefully the gawk script will be
> useful.
That’s interesting, but what the user means by “spam tagging” is the subject
tagging and the message attachment (though I have disabled that due to
overwhelming complaints, though it is the easiest to ‘repair” as they can just
drag the original message out and add it to their no-spam box, users can’t seem
to manage that. They don’t care (or even know) about mail headers.
--
'I cannot! He has been kindness itself to me!' 'And you can be Death
itself to him.'
