RE: 2.64 spamc with 3.0.1 spamd

2004-11-02 Thread Jason J. Ellingson
It is safe to use SA 2.x SpamC with SA 3.x SpamD.

Jason J Ellingson
Technical Consultant

615.301.1682 : nashville
612.605.1132 : minneapolis

www.ellingson.com
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

-Original Message-
From: Theo Van Dinter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, November 02, 2004 3:55 PM
To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: Re: 2.64 spamc with 3.0.1 spamd

On Tue, Nov 02, 2004 at 04:46:47PM -0500, Dave Goodrich wrote:
> Anyone tried it? I hope I do not have to go and rebuild all my toasters. 
> It looks as though it should be fine, we use no Bayes, no AWL.

I haven't tried it, but the spamd protocol wasn't changed between v2 and v3,
so the old spamc binaries ought to continue working for you.

I can't recall if there were any spamc modifications (bug fixes, etc,)
though, so you may want to upgrade them in the future.

-- 
Randomly Generated Tagline:
"L'etat ... C'est moo." - Unknown



Re: 2.64 spamc with 3.0.1 spamd

2004-11-02 Thread Theo Van Dinter
On Tue, Nov 02, 2004 at 04:46:47PM -0500, Dave Goodrich wrote:
> Anyone tried it? I hope I do not have to go and rebuild all my toasters. 
> It looks as though it should be fine, we use no Bayes, no AWL.

I haven't tried it, but the spamd protocol wasn't changed between v2 and v3,
so the old spamc binaries ought to continue working for you.

I can't recall if there were any spamc modifications (bug fixes, etc,)
though, so you may want to upgrade them in the future.

-- 
Randomly Generated Tagline:
"L'etat ... C'est moo." - Unknown


pgpvnZnL0dtSo.pgp
Description: PGP signature