procmail
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Should I tempfail when spamfiltering

2004-08-25 13:30:33
Dan Smart wrote:
David W. Tamkin wrote...
      EXITCODE = $EX_TEMPFAIL
      HOST = "_spamc_failed_"

If you're hoping to get "_spamc_failed_" in the logfile by doing
that, it won't happen unless you have verbose logging on (which you
might, but nothing in that excerpt indicated it).  If LOGABSTRACT is
yes or all, this will log the reason without needing verbosity on:

EXITCODE = $EX_TEMPFAIL
LASTFOLDER = "_spamc_failed_"
HOST # unsetting is enough

Good point, I also missed adding the "-x"

Even with VERBOSE off, I think this already shows up in your log:

  procmail: Program failure (1) of "/usr/bin/spamc"
  procmail: Rescue of unfiltered data succeeded

That's enough for me.

I don't know what $host (case-sensitive) and $DATE are, and we don't
need those second and third checks for X-Spam-Checker.  For fun, let's
rearrange into an exception-based structure.  For a message too big
for spamd, running spamc only costs like formail, so...

  :0 fw
  * ! ^X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin .* on $host
  * ! ^TO_spamassassin-users(_at_)incubator(_dot_)apache(_dot_)org
  * ! ^TO_postfix-users@(postfix.org|cloud9.net)
  | /usr/bin/spamc -x

  :0 e
  {
    :0 fhw
    * > 256000
    | formail -A "X-VMC: BIG"

    :0 E
    {
      EXITCODE = 75     # EX_TEMPFAIL
      HOST              # unsetting is enough
    }
  }

HTH,
Mike


____________________________________________________________
procmail mailing list   Procmail homepage: http://www.procmail.org/
procmail(_at_)lists(_dot_)RWTH-Aachen(_dot_)DE
http://MailMan.RWTH-Aachen.DE/mailman/listinfo/procmail