I'm running spamassassin under procmail.
I was advised to run spamc -x to allow procmail to properly handle spamc
failures.
In reading the man for spamc on the webpage, it seems to contradict itself.
Under the description of -x switch it says:
" -x Don't use the 'safe fallback' error-recovery method, which
passes through the unaltered
message if an error occurs. Instead, exit with an error code,
and let the MTA queue up
the mails for a retry later. "
Under the description of EXITCODES it says:
"If the -x option is specified, 'safe fallback' will be disabled, and
certain error conditions related to communication between spamc and spamd
will not result in an error code. Instead, the message will be passed
through unmodified and an exit code of 0 will be returned."
I want procmail to properly handle problems with spamc. Should I use the -x
switch in this?
Here's the recipe snippet
====== procmailrc =======
EX_TEMPFAIL = 75
:0
* ! ^X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin .* on $host
{
:0
* > 256000
{
:0fhw
| formail -A "X-VMC: BIG"
}
:0 E
* ! [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* ! ^TO_postfix-users@(postfix.org|cloud9.net)
* ! ^X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin .* on $host
{
:0 fw
| /usr/bin/spamc -x
:0 e ## If previous errors, run this
* ! ^X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin .* on $host
{
EXITCODE = $EX_TEMPFAIL
HOST = "_spamc_failed_"
}
}
}
============================
<<Dan>>
