You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to users@spamassassin.apache.org by Matus UHLAR - fantomas <uh...@fantomas.sk> on 2008/04/24 12:39:43 UTC
FAKE_REPLY_C explanation - misbehaving?
Hello,
the FAKE_REPLY_C seems to mean an indication that message looks like reply,
while it's not really a reply:
however I don't really understand the __NO_INR_YES_REF - it probably
should contain all mailers who do not insert the References: header
(and thus they would fire when replying).
Shouldn't __NO_INR_YES_REF be negated instead?
meta FAKE_REPLY_C (__SUBJ_RE && __MISSING_REF && !__NO_INR_YES_REF)
--
Matus UHLAR - fantomas, uhlar@fantomas.sk ; http://www.fantomas.sk/
Warning: I wish NOT to receive e-mail advertising to this address.
Varovanie: na tuto adresu chcem NEDOSTAVAT akukolvek reklamnu postu.
Windows 2000: 640 MB ought to be enough for anybody
Re: FAKE_REPLY_C explanation - misbehaving?
Posted by Matus UHLAR - fantomas <uh...@fantomas.sk>.
> Matus UHLAR - fantomas writes:
> > seems that current metarule fell off my email... I'm inserting it where it
> > should be:
> >
> > On 24.04.08 12:39, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
> > > the FAKE_REPLY_C seems to mean an indication that message looks like reply,
> > > while it's not really a reply:
> >
> > meta FAKE_REPLY_C (__SUBJ_RE && __MISSING_REF && __NO_INR_YES_REF)
On 28.04.08 10:35, Justin Mason wrote:
> if you think it's a bug, please open a bug at the Bugzilla and
> paste the relevant details.
Oh, I found out where's the problem, sorry for bugging, thank you
--
Matus UHLAR - fantomas, uhlar@fantomas.sk ; http://www.fantomas.sk/
Warning: I wish NOT to receive e-mail advertising to this address.
Varovanie: na tuto adresu chcem NEDOSTAVAT akukolvek reklamnu postu.
Linux is like a teepee: no Windows, no Gates and an apache inside...
Re: FAKE_REPLY_C explanation - misbehaving?
Posted by Matus UHLAR - fantomas <uh...@fantomas.sk>.
Hello,
seems that current metarule fell off my email... I'm inserting it where it
should be:
On 24.04.08 12:39, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
> the FAKE_REPLY_C seems to mean an indication that message looks like reply,
> while it's not really a reply:
meta FAKE_REPLY_C (__SUBJ_RE && __MISSING_REF && __NO_INR_YES_REF)
> however I don't really understand the __NO_INR_YES_REF - it probably
> should contain all mailers who do not insert the References: header
> (and thus they would fire when replying).
>
> Shouldn't __NO_INR_YES_REF be negated instead?
>
> meta FAKE_REPLY_C (__SUBJ_RE && __MISSING_REF && !__NO_INR_YES_REF)
is there anyone who could look at this?
Thank tou.
--
Matus UHLAR - fantomas, uhlar@fantomas.sk ; http://www.fantomas.sk/
Warning: I wish NOT to receive e-mail advertising to this address.
Varovanie: na tuto adresu chcem NEDOSTAVAT akukolvek reklamnu postu.
Spam is for losers who can't get business any other way.