similar to: PDFs getting mangled

> On 19 Jan, 2018, at 4:39, Aki Tuomi <aki.tuomi at dovecot.fi> wrote: > > > > On 19.01.2018 04:35, Adam Weinberger wrote: >> Since upgrading to 2.3.0 / 0.5.0.1, incoming PDFs are getting mangled. >> It seems to be happening when I use vnd.dovecot.filter. When I comment >> out the block, things come through fine. >> >> My filter block looks like

Op 1/20/2018 om 11:01 PM schreef Adam Weinberger: >> On 20 Jan, 2018, at 10:05, Adam Weinberger <adamw at adamw.org> wrote: >> >> >>> On 19 Jan, 2018, at 4:39, Aki Tuomi <aki.tuomi at dovecot.fi> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> On 19.01.2018 04:35, Adam Weinberger wrote: >>>> Since upgrading to 2.3.0 / 0.5.0.1, incoming

> On 21 Dec, 2017, at 14:37, Stephan Bosch <stephan at rename-it.nl> wrote: > > Op 12/19/2017 om 8:41 AM schreef Adam Weinberger: >> I'm getting a behaviour with pigeonhole that I wasn't expecting. Am I >> misunderstanding the design? >> >> I run my messages through a vnd.dovecot.filter. It's essentially this: >> >> filter

I'm getting a behaviour with pigeonhole that I wasn't expecting. Am I misunderstanding the design? I run my messages through a vnd.dovecot.filter. It's essentially this: filter "spam_filter"; if spamheaders { fileinto "spam"; stop; } Mail stored in the spam folder is the filtered version, but the implicit-keep message is the original, unfiltered

> On 20 Jan, 2018, at 10:05, Adam Weinberger <adamw at adamw.org> wrote: > > >> On 19 Jan, 2018, at 4:39, Aki Tuomi <aki.tuomi at dovecot.fi> wrote: >> >> >> >> On 19.01.2018 04:35, Adam Weinberger wrote: >>> Since upgrading to 2.3.0 / 0.5.0.1, incoming PDFs are getting mangled. >>> It seems to be happening when I use

Op 1/21/2018 om 4:34 PM schreef Stephan Bosch: > Op 1/20/2018 om 11:01 PM schreef Adam Weinberger: >>> On 20 Jan, 2018, at 10:05, Adam Weinberger <adamw at adamw.org> wrote: >>> >>> >>>> On 19 Jan, 2018, at 4:39, Aki Tuomi <aki.tuomi at dovecot.fi> wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On 19.01.2018 04:35,

On 19.01.2018 04:35, Adam Weinberger wrote: > Since upgrading to 2.3.0 / 0.5.0.1, incoming PDFs are getting mangled. > It seems to be happening when I use vnd.dovecot.filter. When I comment > out the block, things come through fine. > > My filter block looks like this: > require "vnd.dovecot.filter"; > filter "bogofilter_filter"; > >

# 2.2.12: /etc/dovecot/dovecot.conf # OS: Linux 3.15.4-x86_64-linode45 x86_64 openSUSE 12.3 (x86_64) Short version: 1) I filter out spam by using a dovecot sieve filter to act based on a header inserted by bogofilter 2) In some cases, sieve fails to correctly file based on this header 3) Testing with sieve-test indicates that it's testing the wrong header 4) Suggestions? Am I doing

Hello I have implemented recently in my work bogofilter utility to mark messages as Spam or Ham, currently is working perfectly, but I want to move those messages marked as spam to a folder called spam. I installed dovecot-sieve with the intention of using fileinto to accomplish this. my question is: where I put this: require "fileinto"; if header :contains "X-Bogosity"

----- Forwarded message from Klaus Dittrich <kladit@t-online.de> ----- From: kladit@t-online.de (Klaus Dittrich) Subject: files of length zero Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2003 17:08:47 +0100 To: mbp@samba.org User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i X-Bogosity: No, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=0.10.2 Hi Martin, MS-Windows users here sometimes make the expierience to become files of length zero when

Op 12/22/2017 om 3:43 AM schreef Adam Weinberger: >> On 21 Dec, 2017, at 14:37, Stephan Bosch <stephan at rename-it.nl> wrote: >> >> Op 12/19/2017 om 8:41 AM schreef Adam Weinberger: >>> I'm getting a behaviour with pigeonhole that I wasn't expecting. Am I >>> misunderstanding the design? >>> >>> I run my messages through a

DEBIAN package information: ii dovecot-common 0.99.11-3 ii dovecot-imapd 0.99.11-3 ii bogofilter 0.93.1-1 Apologies for cross-posting, but I think the problem lies somewhere in here. Maybe someone can tell me something useful. Now, I've confirmed the following: I received a mail message that was not spam, of size 2132 originally. clamav scanned it and bumped the size up to 2356

Hi, on my small Xen-virtualised server with 48 MiB RAM I use Postfix and Dovecot, because the Debian administrators dislike qmail [1], which is in my opinion despite some maintainability and code quality issues a quite well designed software, because it mostly follows the UNIX principles. Postfix is not able to sort my E-Mail into different Maildir folders and after I looked at procmail's

> On 1 Jul, 2016, at 10:52, Timo Sirainen <tss at iki.fi> wrote: > > On 01 Jul 2016, at 19:39, Adam Weinberger <adamw at adamw.org> wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> 2.2.25 crashes on FreeBSD with a kqueue-related message. I see references to something similar (http://www.dovecot.org/list/dovecot/2012-February.txt) from a couple years ago. >> >> I

At 12:44 AM 9/12/2003 -0400, Adam Weinberger wrote: >New categories are added slowly to the cvsup category lists. It's best >to cvsup using ports-all, and add the directories you don't want (such >as languages: "ports/french*" etc.) to the refuse file. How is having a refuse file slowing down CVSup down best? The fact is a category does not appear often and for those

Hi, 2.2.25 crashes on FreeBSD with a kqueue-related message. I see references to something similar (http://www.dovecot.org/list/dovecot/2012-February.txt) from a couple years ago. I get: Jul 1 10:07:27 imap dovecot: master: Panic: kevent(EV_ADD, READ, 54) failed: Bad file descriptor It's not dumping core, and I get the message even with "protocols =" Downgrading back to 2.2.24

On 16-07-03 03:30:36, Timo Sirainen wrote: > On 02 Jul 2016, at 03:30, Adam Weinberger <adamw at adamw.org> wrote: > > > >>> Jul 1 10:07:27 imap dovecot: master: Panic: kevent(EV_ADD, READ, 54) failed: Bad file descriptor > >>> > >>> It's not dumping core, and I get the message even with "protocols =" > >>> >

I'm using maildrop to filter mail like: xfilter "/usr/bin/spamc" xfilter "/usr/bin/bogofilter -ep" I want to change to deliver (so I can use sieve) but can deliver do this?

Please don't send questions to the postmaster. ----- Forwarded message from ibnu muhd <jaguhkampung@yahoo.com> ----- From: ibnu muhd <jaguhkampung@yahoo.com> Subject: about samba problem Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 20:20:28 -0800 (PST) To: mailman-owner@lists.samba.org X-Bogosity: No, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000230, version=0.9.1.2 --- hello ! i'am a new linux user from

Sascha, please send your message to the mailing list in future, not to the list administrator. Where do people get the idea that this is the right address?? ----- Forwarded message from "Radio Gong 2000 GmbH & Co. KG [Technik]" <sascha.bieler@radiogong.de> ----- From: "Radio Gong 2000 GmbH & Co. KG [Technik]" <sascha.bieler@radiogong.de> Subject: Samba