You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.

Posted to users@spamassassin.apache.org by Justin Mason <jm...@jmason.org> on 2005/07/06 23:02:34 UTC

Re: Question on 3.1.0 mass-checks

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1


Andy Jezierski writes:
> I'm running the mass-checks on my corpus and am noticing that I'm getting 
> the same errors I reported in bug 4115.
> 
> Will the results be valid? Or should I not bother?

I don't think it's 4115 -- 4415 looks more likely.
I'd still run the mass-checks, unless you're getting those on *every*
message.

- --j.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Exmh CVS

iD8DBQFCzEbqMJF5cimLx9ARAnkZAJ44se6M+f2d1NnVgOZGHB2Ka687JACfQ0Mz
LJDWyehWBEJlKtmM+ICBJpI=
=ihzH
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: Question on 3.1.0 mass-checks

Posted by Andy Jezierski <aj...@stepan.com>.

jm@jmason.org wrote on 07/06/2005 04:02:34 PM:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> 
> Andy Jezierski writes:
> > I'm running the mass-checks on my corpus and am noticing that I'm 
getting 
> > the same errors I reported in bug 4115.
> > 
> > Will the results be valid? Or should I not bother?
> 
> I don't think it's 4115 -- 4415 looks more likely.
> I'd still run the mass-checks, unless you're getting those on *every*
> message.
> 
Whoops, finger check, yep 4415.  Quite a few of them, but definitely not 
every message.  I'll let it keep going.

Thanks
Andy