On Fri, 2005-10-21 at 16:02 +0100, D. D. Brierton wrote: > I'm using FC4 with spamassassin-3.0.4-1.fc4. fetchmail delivers mail to > a locally running postfix. spamd is running as a service, and spamc is > called by procmail on my mail. My setup is almost identical to that > desribed here: > > http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/UsedViaProcmail > > However, despite the fact that I have trained spamassassin on a vast > amount of both ham and spam using sa-learn, I suspect that Bayesian > testing is not being applied. I became suspicious that this might be the > case after receiving over a dozen almost identical messages and despite > training spamassassin on them they are still not being identified as > spam. So I started looking at the headers that spamassassin adds to each > message more closely. Here is the header it added to a recent message > from this list: > > X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=5.0 tests=RCVD_BY_IP > autolearn=failed version=3.0.4 > > And here is an example of an incorrectly identified spam message: > > X-Spam-Status: No, score=2.8 required=5.0 tests=HELO_DYNAMIC_IPADDR, > RCVD_BY_IP autolearn=no version=3.0.4 > > Now according to this: > > http://spamassassin.apache.org/tests_3_0_x.html > > in the "tests" part of those headers I ought to see one of: > > BAYES_00 > BAYES_05 > BAYES_20 > BAYES_40 > BAYES_50 > BAYES_60 > BAYES_80 > BAYES_95 > BAYES_99 > > Am I just getting confused or is Bayesian checking not happening? ---- try running... spamassassin -D --lint and checking the output of that Craig -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.
