Semi-OT: Rule2XSBody

[Stef Morrell]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: mailscanner-bounces at lists.mailscanner.info 
> [mailto:mailscanner-bounces at lists.mailscanner.info] On Behalf 
> Of Julian Field
> 
> On 26/06/2009 12:39, Stef Morrell wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > I see the new wiki page recommends compiling the regex for the 
> > Rule2XSBody plugin.
> >
> > What I can't see from the Rule2XSBody or sa-compile 
> documentation is 
> > how this copes with rule changes.
> >
> > A quick google only had one opinion
> > (http://www.davidpashley.com/blog/debian/sa-compile) which suggests 
> > for every rule change, a new compile is required.
> >
> > Unfortunately, it takes quite a long time to compile all 
> the rules and 
> > considering the download of Julian's spear phishing every hour, I 
> > could end up spending more CPU time compiling rules, than applying 
> > them to spam.
> >
> > The question then, is how to resolve the dichotomy. I may well have 
> > rules which supercede, replace, or add to the compiled 
> rules. Equally, 
> > some of the compiled rules may be out of date and shouldn't 
> be there.
> >
> > Do I, in fact, need to perform a new compile for each and 
> every rule 
> > change (in which case, it's not worth me using compiled 
> rules) or does 
> > spamassassin somehow 'know' which rules have changed in the source 
> > files, so I can run a compile perhaps once a day.
> >
> >    
> Rules that aren't sa-compiled will still be used, and you 
> don't have to compile all your local rulesets. I just run 
> sa-compile after sa-update in /usr/sbin/update_spamassassin 
> and leave all my local rulesets as is. 
> Seems to work fine for me.

That's almost certainly ideal. How does one explain to sa-compile that
it should ignore local rulesets?

Stef