Re: [exim] Exim and SpamAssassin

Jerry wrote:

> Hello, again, Marc and all,
>
> OK, more information here.
>
> Looking more closely at the mainlog, I see several routers are
> skipped over, and processing does indeed proceed to either the
> default router (which uses the system files) or, if not found in the
> system files, the catchall.

*SNIP*

> Or should I just disable SpamAssassin router to see what happens?
>

Sure could tell you quickly what is up with the other routers.

> As to an using exiscan - yes, eventually I plan to do this. But I'm
> not familiar with it, and have had too many other things going on to
> delve into it. It's on my list of things to do eventually :-).
>

Believe it or not - Exiscan handles SA so well with naught but defaults and
examples you could have set it up and tested it in less time
(going by message timestamps) than chasing this problem has taken - a
problem not *yet* resolved, BTW.

I use SA in decidedly 'uncommon' ways, from socket locations and fs
rights to UID:GID, storage locations, SQL, custom daemon names, headers,
weighings, rbls, and even the startup files not being in their usual
places - and can still get all the changes I make in place
and tested with 'joe' over ssh in well under a hour by referring to
another server. Probably a lot less if I ever stop and
write them down. <g>

Exiscan takes a ton of work off your back.

Worth the investment. Easily NOT used as well. Comment-out your
'manual' code, activate Exican. Reverse that if you get too tired to
finish testing.

Might as well apply your time and skill to 'durable' solutions as to
extending the life of a pre-Exiscan model.

..and, no. I don't get a sales commission <g> but 'One hand washes the
other' - Exim with Exiscan allows one to concentrate on more pressing
issues.

Bill