Too many MailScanners Spawned

[Matthew Davis]

* Julian Field (mailscanner at ECS.SOTON.AC.UK) wrote:
> At 15:03 26/10/2002, you wrote:
> >* Julian Field (mailscanner at ECS.SOTON.AC.UK) wrote:

> I hope you aren't using SpamAssassin in both MailScanner and procmail. When
> MailScanner has finished scanning the messages, it leaves them for sendmail
> to deliver. MailScanner doesn't get involved in the delivery process at
> all. It doesn't call procmail or anything like that.

I'm not.  I have spam check disabled in MailScanner.

> Calling SpamAssassin from MailScanner will be faster (and more robust) than
> calling it from procmail.

It might be, but when I set this system up, I wanted the X-Spam-* headers.  And maybe I didn't look deep enough, but I found that MailScanner only outputted (if thats a word), (my memory is vague) the tests that were triggered, and a few others, but I wanted specifally the X-Spam-Flag: header, which is the only header I check for spam.

Matthew Davis
http://dogpound.vnet.net/
----------------------------------------------------------------
All I need to know I learned from my cat.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Saturday, October 26, 2002 / 01:48PM