[Spambayes] Re: imapfilter mangling headers!
dave at boost-consulting.com
Thu Apr 17 10:56:45 EDT 2003
Tim Stone - Four Stones Expressions <tim at fourstonesExpressions.com> writes:
> 4/17/2003 8:16:21 AM, David Abrahams <dave at boost-consulting.com> wrote:
>>So I just got started with spambayes and tried to train my system
>>using imapfilter.py. The first problem was that I had to discover on
>>my own that I needed to edit spambayes/Options.py in order to keep
>>imapfilter.py from raising exceptions.
> Keeping in mind that this is still classified as alpha level
> software... We are currently writing the documentation so you don't
> have to discover this stuff for yourself, and the configuration prog
> so you can do this through your browser. It will modify a file
> named bayescustomize.ini, which is where your Options.py
> modifications should go.
That's nifty! Unfortunately, I am not the system administrator on
the system where this will run, so installing things that can
integrate with a webserver may not be an option for me.
>>Then, once I'd done that, I was able to get it to do this:
>> %src/spambayes/imapfilter.py -t -c -v -D bayes.db
>> Loading database bayes.db... Loading state from bayes.db database
>> bayes.db is a new database
>> Training took 10.5770339966 seconds, 0 messages were trained
>>Now, should I be concerned that "0 messages were trained"?
> Not if you didn't have anything in your training folders.
Oh, but I did! Around 200 messages in each one!
>>Should I be concerned that -v didn't produce much verbose output?
>>Since I didn't get any, I decided to poke around and see what was
>>happening. I went to the "unsure" mailbox (known as UnsureBox) in
>>Gnus, and found that none of the messages showed up with senders or
>>subjects. Taking a look at the raw messages, I found the following:
> There's nothing here...
Sorry, maybe the enclosure was dropped. It begins:
Return-Path: <frankokere at rediffmail.com>Received: from mx02.mrf.mail.rcn.net ([184.108.40.206] verified) by stlport.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.5.9) with ESMTP id 201556 for dave at boost-consulting.com; Fri, 21 Feb 2003 17:50:31 -0800Received: from node-c-0bfb.a2000.nl ([220.127.116.11] helo=mx.mail.rcn.net) by mx02.mrf.mail.rcn.net with smtp (Exim 3.35 #4) id 18mOoA-0001sg-00 for david.abrahams at rcn.com; Fri, 21 Feb 2003 20:50:30 -0500From: "FRANK OKERE" <frankokere at rediffmail.com>Date: Sat, 22 Feb 2003 02:50:10To: david.abrahams at rcn.comSubject: STRICLTY CONFIDENTIALMIME-Version: 1.0Content-Type: text/plain;charset="iso-8859-1"Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bitMessage-Id: <E18mOoA-0001sg-00 at mx02.mrf.mail.rcn.net>X-Spam-Warning: This message was accepted from a host or IP address which is listed on one or more email blocking lists. Please see http://www.mail.rcn.net/external/x-header/ for more informationX-Spam-Warning: [SPEWS]  a2000.nl, see http://spews.org/ask.cgi?S2000X-Spambayes-Classification: unsureGood Day,
With warm heart I offer my friendship, and my greetings, and I hope this letter meets you in good time. It will be surprising to you to receive this proposal from me since you do not know me personally. However, I am sincerely seeking your confidence in this transaction, which I propose with my free mind and as a person of integrity.
That's 3 lines; the middle one is blank.
>>Needless to say, I interrupted the classification process! What
>>should I do now? At least 1000 messages have been processed this
>>way. Are they hopelessly mangled?
> We have not seen header dropping in our testing, which is in the very early
They're not dropped; they have apparently had all the newlines
> Since you interrupted the classification, the original messages
> should still be in your inbox, though they may have their delete
> flag set.
> What imap server are you using?
> At any rate, you should probably refrain from using the filter on
> your production mailbox until we figure out what happened when it
> looked at your system. To quote a post from a few days ago: "IMAP
> seems to be a really flukey kind of interface, and until it's been
> used on lots of imap servers, by lots of people, I won't be
> convinced that it's really correct."
Thanks for your help,
More information about the Spambayes