Re: Quick update on SANE rules for SA

[Justin Mason <jm...@jmason.org>]

Matt Hampton writes:
> Evening
> 
> I have been running the updating rules for just under two weeks.  The 
> results are fairly good very few FP's and the ones I have been seeing 
> are on ones that were meant to be purely triggers for META rules - will 
> have to introduce another set which demotes them back to non scoring rules.
> 
> I would be interested in hearing what other people get so that I can 
> tweak my selection process - the latest one has ~140 rules in - I think 
> this low number is more an affect of my corpus size than anything else - 
> mass-checks is running on an older box which grinds everything else to a 
> halt when its running so haven't got a huge number on there.
> 
> I have created a sa-update channel - but won't publish the domain at 
> present until I have spoken to Sane again - haven't heard from Steve yet 
> - am going to try again on Monday.  I am automatically generating them 
> but manually publishing them at present - the latest published file is 
> avaliable from http://www.coders.co.uk/80_sane.cf

hi Matt --

I've copied yesterday's file into SpamAssassin SVN for testing -- keep an
eye on http://ruleqa.spamassassin.org/ , results on our test corpora
should appear tomorrow.

> As a side issue - I am running sa-compile on my production boxes and I 
> have examined the .re files generated and can find neither mine or JM's 
> SOUGHT rules ending up in there.
> 
> Is this expected or is there something about my rules that don't meet 
> the criteria for the extraction process?  I am using body rules....

No, they should be getting in there.  You could try running sa-compile
with "-D" and ensure it's reading the right rule files...

--j.