Kewl kewl.... I'm just lazy.... FreeBSD ports has me spoiled. Is that a
good thing? or a bad thing?
bkw
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tom Kistner" <tom@???>
To: "Brian K. West" <brian@???>
Cc: "Tony Earnshaw" <tonni@???>; <exim-users@???>
Sent: Wednesday, May 21, 2003 8:21 AM
Subject: Re: [Exim] Protect again spam
> Brian K. West wrote:
>
> > I find that exiscan is more efficient than trying to pipe stuff thru
> > spamassassin using routers... Since you can deny an email at SMTP time
with
> > exiscan.
>
> Actually, you can do that with Marcs SA-Exim too.
>
> Some differences between the implementations:
>
> - SA-Exim is a local_scan() module, while exiscan is now a source patch.
> - SA-Exim calls spamc, who in turn calls spamd. exiscan calls spamd
> directly, which gains some performance (but is neglectable sue to SA's
> phlegmatic nature).
> - SA-Exim has more AntiSpam options.
> - exiscan is now more flexible (ACL integration), but also has a steeper
> learning curve (not so newbie friendly).
> - exiscan has a wider scope, SA-Exim is SA only.
>
> So if you're only interested in pure SA integration, SA-Exim (with the
> dynamic loading option) may be what you are looking for. It is more
> cleaner in the way that is does not patch exim.
>
> regards,
>
> /tom
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> ## List details at http://www.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users Exim
details at
http://www.exim.org/ ##
>
>
