bogofilter satisfaction report

[Lennart Sorensen]

On Fri, Apr 29, 2005 at 12:23:54PM -0400, JoeHill wrote:
> On Fri, 29 Apr 2005 12:12:25 -0400
> Lennart Sorensen disseminated the following:
> 
> > > ...so, it classified the mail as 'ham', but nonetheless gave it a very high
> > > score.
> > 
> > That is a VERY small score.
> > 
> > 5.8592e-13 == 5.8592 * 10^-13 = 0.00000000000058592
> > 
> > Low enough for you? :)
> 
> Heh. Me look stupid...again. Oh well, I'm gettin' used to it.
>  
> > So almost certainly your procmail is doing something wrong with the
> > return code of bogofilter or you have the wrong arguments on bogofilter.
> 
> Yep. I forgot to take Peter's advice and use the *second* Procmail recipe given
> in the manpage, I was still using this one:
> 
> :0HB:
> * ? bogofilter
> spam

I use:
:0HB:
* ? /users/lsorense/local/bin/bogofilter
$MAILDIR/bogospam

And it works perfectly.  At least with this version of procmail.  The
other way to do filtering where it does passthrough allows adding the
header to the message which I am thinking I would like to do so I may
change to that.  It is also more like how I ran spamassasin before.

> I'm now using the second one (without the -u for now), and it seems to be
> working (your message got through, eh?).

Great.

Lennart Sorensen
--
The Toronto Linux Users Group.      Meetings: http://tlug.ss.org
TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns
How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://tlug.ss.org/subscribe.shtml