Re: [Evolution] Spamfiltering with evolution - NO LONGER WORKS

[Srinivasa Ragavan <sragavan novell com>]

Looks like some fedora specific issue. I see that Ubuntu works fine,
OpenSUSE too (I use OpenSUSE) and trunk is nice for me.

-Srini.
On Wed, 2008-01-16 at 21:24 -0500, Paul Smith wrote:
> On Wed, 2008-01-16 at 07:50 -0430, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> > My settings haven't changed since spam filtering used to work, and
> > they match what you are suggesting. All that's changed is the Evo
> > version.
> >
> > It *doesn't* work.
>
> It DOES work, for me, for both POP and IMAP accounts, in 2.21.5 and in
> the very latest SVN version.  And in 2.21.4 as well, and also previous
> versions.  Other people have also reported that it's working for them.
> Your blanket statement that "it doesn't work" is incorrect.  It doesn't
> work for YOU (and apparently some others).  But it does work (for at
> least some people).
>
> I don't doubt you, and I'm sure that it's frustrating, but since it does
> work for others that means that the bug won't be so easy to find, and
> will require your cooperation since you're able to reproduce it.  That
> effort on your part is the "hidden cost" of free software.  If you're
> not willing to help, please feel free to return the software to where
> you got it for a full refund.
>
>
> I've already asked for one bit of information which has not yet been
> provided: please examine the modification time on your
> ~/.bogofilter/wordlist.db file before and after you get mail that should
> be spam filtered.  Does the timestamp change?  Also, how large is your
> wordlist.db file?
>
> Also, please run this command (_exactly_ as I've typed it here!)
>
>     /usr/bin/bogofilter -V
>
> and include the output.
>
> Another common reason for spam filtering not working is some other
> application checking your mail.  Evo filtering only happens on mail
> which has never been read before; any checking of the mail (including
> automated checks) can break this.  However, since you say it was all
> working before this doesn't seem likely unless some other change
> happened at the same time.