From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Oct 14 13:50:48 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D2F8916A4BF for ; Tue, 14 Oct 2003 13:50:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smarthost.enta.net (smarthost.enta.net [195.74.97.231]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 41C5C43FCB for ; Tue, 14 Oct 2003 13:50:47 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jacs@gnome.co.uk) Received: from smartsmtp.enta.net (smtp.enta.net [195.74.97.230]) by smarthost.enta.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id CF1931985 for ; Tue, 14 Oct 2003 21:51:26 +0100 (BST) Received: from smtp.enta.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smartsmtp.enta.net (8.12.3/8.12.3) with ESMTP id h9EKsEXW044183 for ; Tue, 14 Oct 2003 21:54:14 +0100 (BST) (envelope-from jacs@gnome.co.uk) Received: from hawk.gnome.co.uk (81-31-113-153.adsl.entanet.co.uk [81.31.113.153]) by smtp.enta.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id C6CA69A180 for ; Tue, 14 Oct 2003 21:54:13 +0100 (BST) Received: from [192.168.123.12] (hawk.gnome.co.uk [192.168.123.12]) by hawk.gnome.co.uk (8.12.9p1/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h9EKodHV007002 for ; Tue, 14 Oct 2003 21:50:40 +0100 (BST) (envelope-from jacs@hawk.gnome.co.uk) From: Chris Stenton To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: <20031014115902.GA25582@rfc-networks.ie> References: <20031012123823.M25378@littlejack.nl> <200310121213.34769.wes@softweyr.com> <1066043654.51363.0.camel@hawk.gnome.co.uk> <20031014115902.GA25582@rfc-networks.ie> Content-Type: text/plain Message-Id: <1066164638.6688.5.camel@hawk.gnome.co.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.4.5 Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2003 21:50:39 +0100 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-MailScanner: Found to be clean Subject: Re: Spamassasin X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2003 20:50:48 -0000 On Tue, 2003-10-14 at 12:59, Philip Reynolds wrote: > Chris Stenton 25 lines of wisdom included: > > I would second this but I use mailscanner which does the same job. > > Mailscanner seems like a very poorly designed piece of software, at > least from my experience with Postfix. > > It directly manipulates the Postfix queue which can cause message > corruption. This has been raised on the Postfix list recently and > since Wietse & co. have been advising _against_ using it with > Postfix. > > Just an FYI. Interesting. I still use sendmail (with check_local) and it seems OK with that but it is setup to use an in and out queue. Chris