Spamassassin or spamd

[Ugo Bellavance]

> Hi,
>
>    Do I need the spamd running for spamassassin to work, or is MS using the
> executable everytime?

MailScanner does *not* use spamd.

In fact, it does not even use the standard executable, spamassassin either :)

MailScanner is written in Perl, SpamAssassin is written in Perl, and MS
simply calls the necessary Perl functions / modules as needed, for maximum
efficiency.

--

Thanks Anthony.  

I finally found out how to be able to run spamassassin with MS.

Since my processor is slow (P pro 200) and I am short on RAM (64 MB for rh9, MS dedicated-machine), I decreased the # of MS childs to avoid swapping (now, at least I've got some free ram when system is idle).  Then I I configured MS to use spamassassin, and SA doesn't seem to die anymore.  However I've got 2 questions:

1- Even if I activated SA, I don't see any traces of SA headers.  Here is a sample:

Message-id: <JFENKGNNHOCOENFPHGJGMEIFCLAA.ugob at linux.ca>
MIME-version: 1.0
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.6604 (9.0.2911.0)
Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Importance: Normal
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-priority: Normal
X-camo-route-MailScanner-Information: Contactez le gestionnaire de courriels
X-camo-route-MailScanner: Found to be clean
Return-Path: ugob at linux.ca
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 18 Sep 2003 01:10:23.0733 (UTC) FILETIME=[A31CC250:01C37D81]

How can I tell it is running?  I can see traffic on outgoing port 2703, but I don't really have any other clue (except that nothing tells me it didn't work).  I found out that means Razor2 is working.  Cool.  I found out DCC runs on port 6277 or 6276.  I've seen some of them, going toward, among others, IP 38.144.80.31:6277  (which has no reverse lookup) and other servers in a similar subnet.

If I didn't change the default for SA headers, isn't it supposed to have a header with the score?

2- Wheh I had SA disabled, I had some spam messages with positive spam headers that were added the {Spam?} tag in the subjec, and others didn't.

Thanks,