At 03:39 PM 2/18/2005, Eric A. Hall wrote:
Is the LDAP stuff in SA usable for global tests, or is it per-user only,
or is there less of a difference than I am imagining here?
The LDAP stuff is to replace user_prefs, not the global test list.
Since you need to get as far as parsing the site config b
On 2/18/2005 3:39 PM, Eric A. Hall wrote:
> Basically... I've already got postfix calling LDAP for a variety of
> filters (see http://www.ehsco.com/reading/20040916ncf1b.gif), and I'd like
> to extend those LDAP entries for global spamassassin tests (I don't do any
> per-user tests at the global
On 2/18/2005 3:05 PM, Matt Kettler wrote:
> spampd implements calls directly to the SA perl API via
> Mail::SpamAssassin. By using the API, the tool becomes responsible for
> directly setting up some of the user configuration. In particular, the
> caller of the perl API specifies where to ge
At 02:49 PM 2/18/2005, Eric A. Hall wrote:
> You need it added to your third-party script, as, based on your
> description, it's invoking the SA perl API's directly.
http://www.worlddesign.com/index.cfm/rd/mta/spampd.htm is what I'm
currently using. It doesn't provide any additional parameters over
On 2/18/2005 2:54 PM, Michael Parker wrote:
> So, you missed the ldap/README file?
http://spamassassin.apache.org/full/3.0.x/dist/doc/ doesn't have it and
http://spamassassin.apache.org/doc.html has zero references to ldap. So
yeah I missed it.
--
Eric A. Hall
On Fri, Feb 18, 2005 at 02:51:42PM -0500, Eric A. Hall wrote:
>
> On 2/18/2005 2:41 PM, Michael Parker wrote:
> > FYI, confusing subject lines and content don't help get your questions
> > answered. Are you talking about LDAP or SQL?
>
> I'm talking about LDAP but it uses the SQL interfaces (fro
On 2/18/2005 2:41 PM, Michael Parker wrote:
> FYI, confusing subject lines and content don't help get your questions
> answered. Are you talking about LDAP or SQL?
I'm talking about LDAP but it uses the SQL interfaces (from what I gather)
and the only real docs are for SQL so that's what I have
On 2/18/2005 2:33 PM, Matt Kettler wrote:
> At 02:21 PM 2/18/2005, Eric A. Hall wrote:
>
>>That's not mutually exclusive, and is actually somewhat inclusive. I mean,
>>if people are using the spamassassin script on a low-volume basis, then
>>there's a low volume of SQL/LDAP lookups, so the compla
FYI, confusing subject lines and content don't help get your questions
answered. Are you talking about LDAP or SQL? In this case maybe there
isn't much of a distinction, but when I filter by subject only, the
chances are lower that I'm gonna read an email about LDAP, but pretty
high I'll read one
From: "Eric A. Hall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> On 2/18/2005 2:17 PM, Matt Kettler wrote:
> > At 02:03 PM 2/18/2005, Eric A. Hall wrote:
> >
> >>http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/spamassassin/branches/3.0/sql/README
> >>(which has a bad MIME-type definition, btw [text/english is not real])
> >>says that
At 02:21 PM 2/18/2005, Eric A. Hall wrote:
That's not mutually exclusive, and is actually somewhat inclusive. I mean,
if people are using the spamassassin script on a low-volume basis, then
there's a low volume of SQL/LDAP lookups, so the complaint is nulled.
True, but it's also intended for users
On 2/18/2005 2:17 PM, Matt Kettler wrote:
> At 02:03 PM 2/18/2005, Eric A. Hall wrote:
>
>>http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/spamassassin/branches/3.0/sql/README
>>(which has a bad MIME-type definition, btw [text/english is not real])
>>says that SQL lookups are only used with spamd, and so presuma
At 02:03 PM 2/18/2005, Eric A. Hall wrote:
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/spamassassin/branches/3.0/sql/README
(which has a bad MIME-type definition, btw [text/english is not real])
says that SQL lookups are only used with spamd, and so presumably they are
not used with spamassassin itself. Furthe
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/spamassassin/branches/3.0/sql/README
(which has a bad MIME-type definition, btw [text/english is not real])
says that SQL lookups are only used with spamd, and so presumably they are
not used with spamassassin itself. Further poking seems to prove this
assumption co
14 matches
Mail list logo
