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

Re: use of spamassassin and razor



On Thu, Feb 20, 2003 at 03:14:24AM -0600, Will Trillich wrote:
> N.B. my perspective comes from my setup -- see sig below. ymmv...
> 
> > well, currently, my spamassassin is not even tagging the mail.
> > will i have to make changes to exim also? is there an easy to
> > understand, step-by-step guide to do that?
> 
> yes, lemme see if i can locate it--
> 
> 	$ grep exim `dpkg -L spamassassin`
> 	/usr/share/doc/spamassassin/README.Debian:
> 		For information on integrating spamassassin and exim, see
> 	/usr/share/doc/spamassassin/README.Debian:
> 		http://dman.ddts.net/~dman/config_docs/exim3_spamassassin.html
> 
> looking there, i see
> 
> 	For information on integrating spamassassin and exim, see
> 	http://dman.ddts.net/~dman/config_docs/exim3_spamassassin.html

this was a good reference. helped a lot!

> > well, i do not have procmail. but i do have a .forward file
> > that is an exim filter. would that be adequate to do the job?
> > but i got a hint of what you are doing in procmailrc and it is
> > close to what i would like to do.
> 
> sure.
> 
> 	if	$h_x-spam-level begins "*****"
> 	then
> 		save Mail/SPAM
> 		logwrite "From $return_path $tod_log\n Subject: $h_subject:\n  Folder: SPAM		 $message_size"
> 		finish
> 	endif
> 
> with x-spam-level i can tweak how many stars i'll tolerate. you
> can use whichever headers you like.

got that. one more question. how do i make some messages bypass spamd?
like for instance, as i understand, debian mailing lists are anyway
scanned for spam using spamassassin.

how and where do i tell spamassassin that 'dont scan a message if it
comes from debian mailing list?' will it have to be in exim.conf (i wont
prefer it) or will it have to be in .forward (exim filter)? preferable
:)

-- 
regards,
sandip p deshmukh
------***--------
<SilverStr> media ethics is an oxymoron, much like Jumbo Shrimp and
            Microsoft Works.
<MonkAway> not to mention NT Security



Reply to: