icheckd vs. SAVI-Perl

[Antony Stone]

On Wednesday 26 November 2003 4:17 pm, Robin M. wrote:

> On Wed, 26 Nov 2003, Julian Field wrote:
> > At 15:26 26/11/2003, you wrote:
> > >I am testing sophos and initially I set it up to run as a daemon with
> > > the icheckd interface, but after reading the mailscanner docs it
> > > appears to suggest that not installing icheckd and compiling the
> > > Savi-Perl module instead. Are there any benefits to running sophos with
> > > SAVI-Perl rather than running icheckd.
> >
> > With SAVI-Perl there is no daemon to crash on you.
>
> I see. If there are no other benefits  maybe I will use daemontools to
> make sure it is always available. Does this interface have a history of
> turning into a Zombie.

Do have some reason for preferring icheckd?

Do you have any reason to believe that calling icheckd will be more efficient
than using Savi-Perl?

I'm just interested to know why you're trying to go against the system - in my
experience Julian usually chooses the best path.

Antony.

--
Documentation is like sex.
When it's good, it's very very good.
When it's bad, it's still better than nothing.

                                                     Please reply to the list;
                                                           please don't CC me.