[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Spamfiltering with KMail (was: Re: Multi-tasking)

Am Mittwoch, 28. Juni 2006 12:57 schrieb David Martínez Moreno:
> El miércoles, 28 de junio de 2006 11:50, Alejandro Exojo escribió:
> > I have an Athlon 800, and when I download my email, kmail blocks
> > completely, and doesn't refreshes until spamassassin finishes processing
> > at least the current email, but if I switch to another application, it
> > works very well.
> 	That is the most annoying KMail feature I have seen, and I find
> unbelievable that KMail developers hadn't taken care of it yet. It is...two
> years old? Three? And it makes KMail unuseable with a spamassassin
> configured with DNS queries. :-(


there is a - well at least one - huge bug report about it:


> 	The last time I debugged the problem it was due to KMail looking every
> timeslice it has into the pipe it opens to spamassasin, not every, say,
> half a second.

Hmmm, I would have thought the problem is just that KMail starts the spam 
filter synchronously. This might not be that easy to change.

I used bogofilter which I believe to use less resources than spamassassin 
while still giving good results (once I learned it).

I found out that it likes large buffer sizes when the spam database grows, so 
I added "-k 50" as option to the bogofilter related filter rules. The best 
value may vary depending on the available RAM and the size of spam 
database... the man page says "The recommended size is one third of the size 
of the database file.", but I use more and I believe it helps.

I also regularily run a script like this:


bf_compact ~/.bogofilter
rm -rf ~/.bogofilter.old

But I really only required it on my notebook which seems to get more spam than 
my workstation at work.

I would like to try out KMail with crm114, but it may take quite some time 
till I manage to take the time to try it out.

Martin Steigerwald - team(ix) GmbH - http://www.teamix.de
gpg: 19E3 8D42 896F D004 08AC A0CA 1E10 C593 0399 AE90

Reply to: