Anyone have an answer as to why everything from suse-linux-e@suse.com labeled SPAM? Each reply to a reply then has an added SPAM (e.g.: SPAM: Re: SPAM: Re: [SLE] Protecting ...) Any fix available? StephenW
Sat, 14 Oct 2006, by winstephen@yahoo.com:
Anyone have an answer as to why everything from suse-linux-e@suse.com labeled SPAM?
See the thread "Threading on mailing list broken?"
Each reply to a reply then has an added SPAM (e.g.: SPAM: Re: SPAM: Re: [SLE] Protecting ...)
Any fix available?
in your .procmailrc : SED="/usr/bin/sed" :0 * ^X-Mailinglist:.*(open)?suse(-linux-e)? { :0 fwh | $SED -e 's/SPAM:\ //' } Theo -- Theo v. Werkhoven Registered Linux user# 99872 http://counter.li.org ICBM 52 13 26N , 4 29 47E. + ICQ: 277217131 SUSE 9.2 + Jabber: muadib@jabber.xs4all.nl Kernel 2.6.8 + See headers for PGP/GPG info. Claimer: any email I receive will become my property. Disclaimers do not apply.
Theo, On Saturday 14 October 2006 05:29, Theo v. Werkhoven wrote:
...
Each reply to a reply then has an added SPAM (e.g.: SPAM: Re: SPAM: Re: [SLE] Protecting ...)
Any fix available?
in your .procmailrc :
...
KMail filter actions can edit headers directly.
Theo -- Theo v. Werkhoven
Randall Schulz
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 The Saturday 2006-10-14 at 05:23 -0700, StephenW wrote:
Anyone have an answer as to why everything from suse-linux-e@suse.com labeled SPAM?
Badly trained Bayes database at SuSE mail server. And they know it. :-/ - -- Cheers, Carlos E. R. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Made with pgp4pine 1.76 iD8DBQFFMOa+tTMYHG2NR9URAjbbAJsFVlavNDiCxzSu/5gXiy/dQyKXIgCdGiWM eI9TOy607OrIztF18ozuRIA= =7VlT -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
On Sat, 2006-10-14 at 15:31 +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
The Saturday 2006-10-14 at 05:23 -0700, StephenW wrote:
Anyone have an answer as to why everything from suse-linux-e@suse.com labeled SPAM?
Badly trained Bayes database at SuSE mail server. And they know it. :-/
So while its not MyRealBox which is Novell its their fault for messing up the Suse email servers and filters. Looks like they are not watching the list as closely as they should. Should we start a pool on how long it will take to fix this time? CWSIV
Carl William Spitzer IV wrote:
On Sat, 2006-10-14 at 15:31 +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
The Saturday 2006-10-14 at 05:23 -0700, StephenW wrote:
Anyone have an answer as to why everything from suse-linux-e@suse.com labeled SPAM? Badly trained Bayes database at SuSE mail server. And they know it. :-/
So while its not MyRealBox which is Novell its their fault for messing up the Suse email servers and filters. Looks like they are not watching the list as closely as they should.
Should we start a pool on how long it will take to fix this time?
I'll take about the time SCO provides real evidence against IBM. ;-)
On Tue, 2006-10-17 at 20:15 -0400, James Knott wrote:
Carl William Spitzer IV wrote:
On Sat, 2006-10-14 at 15:31 +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
The Saturday 2006-10-14 at 05:23 -0700, StephenW wrote:
Anyone have an answer as to why everything from suse-linux-e@suse.com labeled SPAM? Badly trained Bayes database at SuSE mail server. And they know it. :-/
So while its not MyRealBox which is Novell its their fault for messing up the Suse email servers and filters. Looks like they are not watching the list as closely as they should.
Should we start a pool on how long it will take to fix this time?
I'll take about the time SCO provides real evidence against IBM. ;-)
Then see my message entitled: Evolution hack for miss marked email [SOLVED] Its a decent method. Since the mail is stored in a text file you just follow the simple directions and fix it yourself. -- ___ _ _ _ ____ _ _ _ | | | | [__ | | | |___ |_|_| ___] | \/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 The Monday 2006-10-16 at 18:21 -0700, Carl William Spitzer IV wrote:
Should we start a pool on how long it will take to fix this time?
They did it on Monday. - -- Cheers, Carlos E. R. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Made with pgp4pine 1.76 iD8DBQFFNYDltTMYHG2NR9URAu8hAJ9bHrCVjOX/KOM2LW/nZw6bAxD64gCfbEjz VeKYb8kCorfVodlxn+PXSQA= =V3JC -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
On Wed, 2006-10-18 at 03:18 +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
The Monday 2006-10-16 at 18:21 -0700, Carl William Spitzer IV wrote:
Should we start a pool on how long it will take to fix this time?
They did it on Monday.
that was quick. Will they be as quick to return to YAST for 10.2? -- ___ _ _ _ ____ _ _ _ | | | | [__ | | | |___ |_|_| ___] | \/
participants (6)
-
Carl William Spitzer IV -
Carlos E. R. -
James Knott -
Randall R Schulz -
StephenW -
Theo v. Werkhoven