ANNOUNCE: Beta 4.27.4 released

[Pete]

Julian Field wrote:

> G'day all,
>
> I have just put 4.27.4 on the website. Note this is a beta release.
> Download as usual from www.mailscanner.info.
>
> You can get the full ChangeLog from here:
> www.sng.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailscanner/ChangeLog
>
> The new changes since 4.27.3 are mostly:
>
> * New Stuff *
>
> - Added "Non-Forging Viruses" list which works the opposite way around
> to the
>   "Silent Viruses" list. If a virus report contains any words in this
> list,
>   then the silent status is over-ridden by this. The net result is
> that you
>   can put All-Viruses in the silent viruses list, so that by default no
>   warnings are sent to senders. But put markers for joke programs or
> macro
>   viruses in this list and the senders will still be warned about
> them, as
>   they are known not to forge the From address.
> - Added options to add new headers containing the envelope sender and/or
>   envelope recipients addresses. The names of the headers are, of course,
>   configurable.
> - Much improved clamav-wrapper, courtesy of Kevin Spicer.
> - Added $subject to Subject: line in sample recipient.spam.report.txt
> to show
>   it can be used. Should ideally get all other languages translated.
>
> * Fixes *
>
> - Exim multiple ACLs now supported for SPF compatibility.
> --
> Julian Field
> www.MailScanner.info
> Professional Support Services at www.MailScanner.biz
> MailScanner thanks transtec Computers for their support
> PGP footprint: EE81 D763 3DB0 0BFD E1DC 7222 11F6 5947 1415 B654
>
>
>
Julian, realising this is a beta, once this become a gold release -
knowing that i do not use bayes, dcc, razor etc, and currently have ms
4.24-5 and sa 2.60 and clamav, bigevil and backhair - is it likely
(assuming almost default settings) that the newer versions of both
mailscanner and spam assassin will be far better at catching spam/shitty
virus email product, compared to my current versions?

I am trying to guess whether its worth upgrading based purely on version
comparison alone?

thanks
Pete