Re: AM_*FLAGS and autoconf

[Norman Gray]

Stepan and all,

On 2005 Feb 22 , at 11.54, Stepan Kasal wrote:

> On Fri, Feb 18, 2005 at 04:30:13PM +0000, Norman Gray wrote:
> > Sorry for taking a while to respond -- my list subscription had been
> > suspended by lists.gnu.org _again_, because of the proportion of
> > thus-delivered spam our boundary mailhosts had rejected.
>
> this is interesting, as there should no longer be so much spam 
> delivered
> via gnu.org lists.  Several lists have been secured so that they 
> distribute
> only a very limited amount of spam, eg. address@hidden
> (The filtering is semi-manual.)

Apologies: when I grepped the appropriate logs to send Stepan the 
off-list details, I discovered that it was indeed bug-automake and 
automake-patches that were being bounced (the suspension happens so 
often I don't read the message any more, so the list name doesn't sink 
in).  There doesn't appear to have been a spam problem on this list.

> The list bug-automake is not subject to this filtering, though.
> The reason is that it's important that a delayed bug report just before
> a release can be disastrous.

Is this an actual problem rather than a theoretical one?  The spam 
scores in the bounces I saw were pretty high: spamassassin scores of 10 
to 15, where 5 counts as `probable' and 8 is enough for an unequivocal 
rejection, here.  That's clear blue water as far as false positives go.

> I'd be glad to hear the deatils, perhaps off the list, as we are 
> getting
> off-topic.

Indeed: I'm replying on-list just to correct my initial thinko.  If 
anyone wants to carry on discussing this we should at least change the 
subject line.

Best wishes,

Norman


--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Norman Gray  :  Physics & Astronomy, Glasgow University, UK
http://www.astro.gla.ac.uk/users/norman/  :  www.starlink.ac.uk