v4.85.1.0 Beta for Linux RPM Available

[Jerry Benton]

> 
> On Feb 18, 2015, at 11:18 AM, Rick Cooper <rcooper at dwford.com> wrote:
> 
> This applies to SpamAssassin as well. I sent Jules code to move MailScanner
> to use the Spamd process years ago. Now the clamav module had a lot of
> issues because when internal defs within the clam code changed the module
> would puke until someone patched the module but it makes no sense to me why
> anything MailScanner shares should be based on a perl module if there is a
> daemon available to communicate with. Spamd protocol is pretty simple and
> fairly easy to integrate within MailScanner. The difference in speed is
> pretty much nil but the difference in MailScanner memory usage per child is
> significant. When I originally worked with JF to integrate the clamd code
> his biggest hesitation was he wasn't comfortable with network code... I
> would bet that was the biggest reason for handling postfix the way it's
> handled as well. Whoever is currently developing MS should really look at
> moving toward spamd support in place of the perl module.


Rick,

Please send me the working code you have for this. I will add it to the development of the next version. The same is true for Postfix handling if you have anything. I have spoken to Wietse Venema regarding MailScanner integration of Postfix and he doesn’t like how it is currently done and posted a recommendation years ago on postfix.org that Postfix shouldn’t be used with MailScanner. In short, MailScanner should be using a milter for Postfix.

-
Jerry Benton
www.mailborder.com