OK, fine, you have persuaded me. So I have one question: how can I delete the message, when we use qmail and for local delivery we use the qmail-local? We run the SA after the AMAVIS + antivirus (both written in the .qmail file, because these programs must be turn off/on by the user). The chain of the programs, that fotward the message between each other is long. So we need the solution with qmail. If we would use procmail for local delivery, it would be easy, because is was many times described here ...
But when SA could delete the message ... ;-) On Wed, 17 Sep 2003, Robert Kehl wrote: > ----- Original Message ----- > From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2003 1:56 PM > Subject: Re: [SAtalk] SA and tagging/removing > > > > When I first saw the SA, I marveled, why SA cannot delete the mail. SA > can't delete the message. The possibility of the message deletion > depends on the MTA you are using. If you use procmail for local > delivery, you can teach the procmail to delete the message, if you use > other program, you must teach your program to delete. :( > > Why SA itself cannot delete??? It would be easy for programming, or > not? > > No, it wouldn't. > > Imagine your SA is configured to work together with your MTA, be it > 'exim' in this case. exim receivies a message, and gives it somehow to > SA. SA now "deletes" it - the only thing SA could do is throw it away > and tell exim about it. But it's up to exim to care for the mail, it's > exim maintaining the spool file and doing the delivery, not SA. > > So, SA does a pretty good job by givng a modified mail back to exim and > tell exim wether it's spam or not. > > There's one slight exception from the above: You may configure certain > MTAs to let SA jump in at SMTP receive time and reject the message > before it has been accepted in its whole or even teergrub the sender. > The former is close to "SA deleting the message", although it's > nevertheless the MTA actually doing it. But because they work so very > close together, you could get the impression that SA does the job. SA > still flags the mail only, but the MTA reacts in the same session and > quite immediatly, that's all. > > You may substitue the term 'exim' with one of 'postfix', 'sendmail', > 'Qmail', 'smail' and the like. > > hth, > > Robert Kehl > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Welcome to geek heaven. http://thinkgeek.com/sf _______________________________________________ Spamassassin-talk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk
