BERTRAND Joël a écrit :
Clint Adams a écrit :
On Sat, Jun 09, 2007 at 08:46:53PM +0200, BERTRAND Joël wrote:
Right. For me, one think is very suspect. Milter-greylist nor
clamd are not able to fork on kant.
What makes you think that they're unable to fork?
Because clamd uses mul
Clint Adams a écrit :
On Sat, Jun 09, 2007 at 08:46:53PM +0200, BERTRAND Joël wrote:
Right. For me, one think is very suspect. Milter-greylist nor clamd
are not able to fork on kant.
What makes you think that they're unable to fork?
Because clamd uses multithread and multitask feat
On Sat, Jun 09, 2007 at 08:46:53PM +0200, BERTRAND Joël wrote:
> Right. For me, one think is very suspect. Milter-greylist nor clamd
> are not able to fork on kant.
What makes you think that they're unable to fork?
> The only significative difference for me is the libc release.
Clint Adams a écrit :
On Sat, Jun 09, 2007 at 07:51:26PM +0200, BERTRAND Joël wrote:
Some inbound mails are refused by kant (because clamd cannot scan all
inbound mails). They remain in sendmail DATA stage and SMTP transaction
aborts due to a timeout. I don't understand why with the same
On Sat, Jun 09, 2007 at 07:51:26PM +0200, BERTRAND Joël wrote:
> Some inbound mails are refused by kant (because clamd cannot scan all
> inbound mails). They remain in sendmail DATA stage and SMTP transaction
> aborts due to a timeout. I don't understand why with the same
> configuration, MX1
Hello,
I use two UltraSparc workstations, the first one is an U80 named kant
([EMAIL PROTECTED]), the other one is an U60 named rayleigh ([EMAIL
PROTECTED]). kant is
a MX1 mail server that runs on debian testing sendmail, milter-greylist,
mimedefang with spamassassin and clamd.
6 matches
Mail list logo
