On Wed, Feb 20, 2002 at 10:53:13AM -0500, Greg Ward wrote:
| On 20 February 2002, Ben Strawson said:
| > I'm probably missing something here (wouldn't be the first time), but
| > why does hardly anyone use the "transport_filter" option to invoke
| > spamassassin (and other similar programs). Most people (I would have
| > thought) will be using spamassassin on local deliveries, so this to me
| > is the quickest way to configure it.
That does sound like a very good idea and a much simpler (and less
resource heavy) mechanism.
| Hmmm, good idea. That works as long as all you want to do is filter the
| mail (eg. add "this is spam" headers), but not if you want to reroute
| the message based on the outcome of the filter -- eg. save spam to a
| special folder and send everything else on.
Good point Greg. I use an exim filter to drop my mail in various
places, and I think if I used a transport_filter, then SA wouldn't be
run until exim has decided which folder it belongs in, and the spam
wouldn't be dropped into my spam folder. Too bad it won't work for my
setup. (it sounds like it would work if you use procmail for
filtering, though) IIRC exim 4 has a mechanism to include a filter
(and achieve the results I want) in a much more straightforward
manner.
-D
--
A kindhearted woman gains respect,
but ruthless men gain only wealth.
Proverbs 11:16
