Configuring SpamAssassin and spamd [SCANNED]

Dave's List Addy listonly at WEBPRESENCEGROUP.NET
Sat Feb 28 20:07:06 GMT 2004

On 2/28/04 10:39 AM, "Julian Field" wrote:

> So don't think that calling procmail (in order to call spamc in order for it
> to talk to spamd in order for it to pass the message the function library
> and return all the results all the way back to sendmail) is going to be any
> faster, because it will not and cannot be faster. In comparison, MailScanner
> bypasses procmail, spamc and spamd in the processing of a message by
> SpamAssassin.
> Please can someone post this in the FAQ so I don't have to explain it all
> again? Thanks folks!

Thanks Julian!
David Thurman
List Only at Web Presence Group Net

More information about the MailScanner mailing list