On Monday, May 28, 2012 02:22:32 AM David Hrbáč wrote:
Dne 26.5.2012 18:33, Lamar Owen napsal(a):
Which is just as well, since this amavisd-new-milter is different from
amavisd-milter, which is currently at version 1.5.0, the version that is
compatible with amavisd-new 2.7.0 and up. It's
Dne 26.5.2012 18:33, Lamar Owen napsal(a):
The amavisd-new-milter package does exist for CentOS 5.8; I cannot, however,
find an amavisd-new-milter package for CentOS 6 in either rpmforge or
rpmforge-extras.
Right,
there's no el6 build because of spec file:
10 %{?el6:%define _without_milter
On Sat, May 26, 2012 at 2:08 PM, Lamar Owen lo...@pari.edu wrote:
On Saturday, May 26, 2012 12:47:04 PM Les Mikesell wrote:
Have you looked at MimeDefang's ability to run all of your scanners
out of one milter?
Yes.
Doing the same thing with amavisd-new on the few sendmail installs I still
Dne 25.5.2012 02:00, Lamar Owen napsal(a):
At the moment both EPEL and RPMforge are on a 2.6.x amavisd-new; 2.7 makes
some changes in the AM.PDP protocol that can break, for instance,
amavisd-milter (distinct from the much less useful amavis-milter). Neither
repo has amavisd-milter, so
On Saturday, May 26, 2012 05:15:41 AM David Hrbáč wrote:
Dne 25.5.2012 02:00, Lamar Owen napsal(a):
At the moment both EPEL and RPMforge are on a 2.6.x amavisd-new; 2.7 makes
some changes in the AM.PDP protocol that can break, for instance,
amavisd-milter (distinct from the much less
On Sat, May 26, 2012 at 11:33 AM, Lamar Owen lo...@pari.edu wrote:
To my knowledge no repos have the amavisd-milter package available; I've
built my own for six years or so. I've used both, and the amavisd-new-milter
(/usr/sbin/amavis-milter) is not nearly as useful as this amavisd-milter.
On Saturday, May 26, 2012 12:47:04 PM Les Mikesell wrote:
Have you looked at MimeDefang's ability to run all of your scanners
out of one milter?
Yes.
Doing the same thing with amavisd-new on the few sendmail installs I still have
running; amavisd-new runs clam (or, at one site, the sophos
On Thursday, May 24, 2012 12:42:59 PM Les Mikesell wrote:
But odds are pretty good that you could grab the scalpel src rpm from
epel and fix it to rebuild against the newer libtre in a matter of
minutes. - just changing the spec, not the source...
Probably so, and I know how to do that, but
On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 2:09 PM, Lamar Owen lo...@pari.edu wrote:
Probably so, and I know how to do that, but I wasn't illustrating a specific
workaround, just illustrating the problem.
Yes, you are right to bring it up, but I don't think it should scare
people off. You just have to pay
Les Mikesell wrote:
On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 2:09 PM, Lamar Owen lo...@pari.edu wrote:
Probably so, and I know how to do that, but I wasn't illustrating a
specific workaround, just illustrating the problem.
Yes, you are right to bring it up, but I don't think it should scare
people off. You
On Thursday, May 24, 2012 03:26:02 PM Les Mikesell wrote:
But many, probably most of those cases are revs with forward/backward
compatibility. It's hard to generalize about that, though.
Yep, it sure is. Forward/backward compatibility is almost entirely in the
hands of the upstream
11 matches
Mail list logo
