hi michael, you all can find the code i talked about here: http://ankh-morp.org/~vetinari/tmp/sa-client.txt it is used as "SpamAssassin integration for qpsmtpd". but the code should be useable for everything else. i'm currently getting forward in porting libspamc to perl, but things are quite tough :) so it may take another while.
spamc -y is not what i want, i would like to have the spamc protocoll being more interactive, so that spamd only sends out what is needed by the client. would be nice to have all things in Mail::SpamAssassin::PerMsgStatus as triggers to spamd, if you know what i mean? so if one does Mail::SpamAssassin::Spamc::PerMsgStatus->get_names_of_subtests_hit(), spamc writes to spamd GET_NAMES_OF_SUBTESTS_HIT and spamd returns the results of Mail::SpamAssassin::PerMsgStatus to spamc. i think this should be very easy, but may require a lot of changes in the spamc/spamd communication. regards, johannes > -----Original Message----- > From: Michael Parker [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, July 14, 2004 7:53 PM > To: Johannes russek > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: libspamc > > > On Wed, Jul 14, 2004 at 07:48:02PM +0200, Johannes russek wrote: > > > > ah, okay. the windows guys. a pure perl interface would of > course be very > > platform > > independent, but i wonder if the performance impact would be > big or not, as > > performance might be an important issue for the ones using spamc/spamd. > > i have got a pure perl implementation of the spamc part, but it > does only > > support > > UNIX domain sockets, not tcp. > > that might not be very hard to implement, but we could try to > bench my xs > > interface > > against that pure perl thingie on a socketfile, when i'm finished. > > > > /me drools. Can you send it to the list? > > > anyway, another question to the list about this issue: > > is it planned to have libspamc include more details about the > tests spamd > > made? > > right now there is only the report and the score/threshold, > nothing else. > > so if one wants to have the number of hits, the names of the > tests and so > > on, > > he (well, in this case, me :)) has to regexp it out of the report. > > that could have another performance impact, so why don't make the spamd > > protocoll > > more machine processable and add HTTP like some lines like > > TestsHit: RAZOR2_CHECK DCC_CHECK DNS_FROM_RFC1_DNS > > and so on. > > could that be done? > > Been awhile, but maybe spamc -y is what you want? If not it's possible > the return headers could be augmented a bit, maybe an RFE in bugzilla > with exactly what you're looking for, and of course patches welcome :) > > Michael >
