You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to users@spamassassin.apache.org by ts...@wise.k12.va.us on 2006/03/07 14:22:46 UTC
Amavisd replacement suggestion
We have been running Spamassassin for two years or so now. Spamassassin has been great. We run Postfix, Amavisd and Spamassassin. I really need some suggestions to replace Amavisd. I have two problems with Amavisd that I cannot seem to fix. Any recommendations on how to call Spamassassin would be welcome.
Thanks
Shane
Re: Amavisd replacement suggestion
Posted by Ralf Hildebrandt <Ra...@charite.de>.
* Craig White <cr...@azapple.com>:
> I think the basis of Wietse's recommendation is a philosophical one and
> while pertinent to his line of thinking, MailScanner seems to me to be
> the easiest to install, the most effective when properly installed, the
> most frequently updated scanning wrapper and an extremely helpful list.
BTW, Postfix will have a milter interface at some point in time.
--
Ralf Hildebrandt (i.A. des IT-Zentrums) Ralf.Hildebrandt@charite.de
Charite - Universitätsmedizin Berlin Tel. +49 (0)30-450 570-155
Gemeinsame Einrichtung von FU- und HU-Berlin Fax. +49 (0)30-450 570-962
IT-Zentrum Standort CBF send no mail to spamtrap@charite.de
Re: Amavisd replacement suggestion
Posted by Craig White <cr...@azapple.com>.
On Tue, 2006-03-07 at 17:29 +0100, nick wrote:
> Michael W Cocke wrote:
> > On Tue, 7 Mar 2006 15:04:11 -0000, you wrote:
> >
> >
> >>Works fine with postfix...
> >>
> >>http://wiki.mailscanner.info/doku.php?id=documentation:configuration:mta:pos
> >>tfix:politics&s=politics
> >
> >
> >
> > Thanks Martin - very interesting! When I first heard of mailscanner I
> > was very excited - I've been using Amavisd-new forever, but I'm not
> > exactly in love with it. When I was told mailscanner didn't work with
> > postfix I was very disappointed... Guess I should have checked
> > further.
> >
> > Mike-
> > --
> > If you're not confused, you're not trying hard enough.
> > --
> > Please note - Due to the intense volume of spam, we have installed
> > site-wide spam filters at catherders.com. If email from you bounces,
> > try non-HTML, non-encoded, non-attachments,
> >
> It's not that mailscanner doesn't work with postfix, but that it uses
> unsupported methods to interface with postfix queues (supposedly risking
> corruption and lost messages, according to the postfix programmer),
> which is why you might have heard it doesn't "work" with postfix.
>
> If the guy that writes postfix recommends to not use it, I think that's
> a fairly good reason to not do so.
----
and no one is going to criticize you for feeling this way. There are
many of us that have the utmost confidence in Julian and MailScanner and
if at some point in time, Postfix should do something to render
MailScanner incompatible, it will be fixed, just like integrating
MailScanner with any other MTA.
I think the basis of Wietse's recommendation is a philosophical one and
while pertinent to his line of thinking, MailScanner seems to me to be
the easiest to install, the most effective when properly installed, the
most frequently updated scanning wrapper and an extremely helpful list.
I think it's been an excellent 'add-on' for Postfix but there will
always be some who follow Wietse's lead and that is OK too....to them, I
say, enjoy amavisd-new, which I am sure is a good package too. I just
found it took too much to get going and stayed with MailScanner even
though I migrated from Sendmail to Postfix. It works and has worked for
well over a year - no problems and has been easy to update too!
Craig
Re: Amavisd replacement suggestion
Posted by nick <ni...@mobilia.it>.
Michael W Cocke wrote:
> On Tue, 7 Mar 2006 15:04:11 -0000, you wrote:
>
>
>>Works fine with postfix...
>>
>>http://wiki.mailscanner.info/doku.php?id=documentation:configuration:mta:pos
>>tfix:politics&s=politics
>
>
>
> Thanks Martin - very interesting! When I first heard of mailscanner I
> was very excited - I've been using Amavisd-new forever, but I'm not
> exactly in love with it. When I was told mailscanner didn't work with
> postfix I was very disappointed... Guess I should have checked
> further.
>
> Mike-
> --
> If you're not confused, you're not trying hard enough.
> --
> Please note - Due to the intense volume of spam, we have installed
> site-wide spam filters at catherders.com. If email from you bounces,
> try non-HTML, non-encoded, non-attachments,
>
It's not that mailscanner doesn't work with postfix, but that it uses
unsupported methods to interface with postfix queues (supposedly risking
corruption and lost messages, according to the postfix programmer),
which is why you might have heard it doesn't "work" with postfix.
If the guy that writes postfix recommends to not use it, I think that's
a fairly good reason to not do so.
Re: Amavisd replacement suggestion
Posted by Michael W Cocke <co...@catherders.com>.
On Tue, 7 Mar 2006 15:04:11 -0000, you wrote:
>Works fine with postfix...
>
>http://wiki.mailscanner.info/doku.php?id=documentation:configuration:mta:pos
>tfix:politics&s=politics
Thanks Martin - very interesting! When I first heard of mailscanner I
was very excited - I've been using Amavisd-new forever, but I'm not
exactly in love with it. When I was told mailscanner didn't work with
postfix I was very disappointed... Guess I should have checked
further.
Mike-
--
If you're not confused, you're not trying hard enough.
--
Please note - Due to the intense volume of spam, we have installed
site-wide spam filters at catherders.com. If email from you bounces,
try non-HTML, non-encoded, non-attachments,
Re: Amavisd replacement suggestion
Posted by Ralf Hildebrandt <Ra...@charite.de>.
* Michael Monnerie <m....@zmi.at>:
> On Dienstag, 7. März 2006 16:11 Craig White wrote:
> > personally found amavisd-new to be a PITA
>
> Isn't PITA some sort of Greek bread? The one they use for Gyros, I
> believe. Wait, looking on wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pita
> So why is it like Greek bread?
It's like a pita in the way that you can fill in different virus
scanners and spamassassin/dspam.
--
Ralf Hildebrandt (i.A. des IT-Zentrums) Ralf.Hildebrandt@charite.de
Charite - Universitätsmedizin Berlin Tel. +49 (0)30-450 570-155
Gemeinsame Einrichtung von FU- und HU-Berlin Fax. +49 (0)30-450 570-962
IT-Zentrum Standort CBF send no mail to spamtrap@charite.de
Re: [OT] Amavisd replacement suggestion
Posted by "Chr. v. Stuckrad" <st...@mi.fu-berlin.de>.
On Tue, Mar 07, 2006 at 04:42:31PM +0100, Michael Monnerie wrote:
> Isn't PITA some sort of Greek bread? The one they use for Gyros, I
> believe. Wait, looking on wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pita
> So why is it like Greek bread?
May be, amavisd is best if toasted (as I like pita==pide :-)
But if 'amavisd is a PITA' meant the old Version,
which starts 'one perl-process per mail' that
is enormously slow and cpu-power-hungy compared
to amavisd which comples only once, then stays
in memory and then only forks children.
So the old one is more a pain in the server,
a chance to 'toast' the Server or your mail :-)
Stucki
Re: Amavisd replacement suggestion
Posted by Michael Monnerie <m....@zmi.at>.
On Dienstag, 7. März 2006 16:11 Craig White wrote:
> personally found amavisd-new to be a PITA
Isn't PITA some sort of Greek bread? The one they use for Gyros, I
believe. Wait, looking on wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pita
So why is it like Greek bread?
mfg zmi
--
// Michael Monnerie, Ing.BSc --- it-management Michael Monnerie
// http://zmi.at Tel: 0660/4156531 Linux 2.6.11
// PGP Key: "lynx -source http://zmi.at/zmi2.asc | gpg --import"
// Fingerprint: EB93 ED8A 1DCD BB6C F952 F7F4 3911 B933 7054 5879
// Keyserver: www.keyserver.net Key-ID: 0x70545879
Re: Amavisd replacement suggestion
Posted by Craig White <cr...@azapple.com>.
On Tue, 2006-03-07 at 09:57 -0500, Michael W Cocke wrote:
> On Tue, 7 Mar 2006 14:10:26 -0000, you wrote:
>
> >Shane
> >
> >Have a look at MailScanner as an alternative to amavisd - it's nice to have
> >a choice isn't it..
>
> My understanding is that mailscanner doesn't work safely with postfix.
> (IIRC someone on this list told me that when I first encountered
> mailscanner and was going to switch from amavisd myself.)
>
> What problems are you having with amavisd? Since it's written in perl
> it's actually pretty straightforward to make mods to it.
----
I use MailScanner with Postfix on many servers FWIW
I think a full explanation (for those interested) can be found here...
http://www.sng.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailscanner/serve/cache/382.html
I personally found amavisd-new to be a PITA and MailScanner to be quite
easy.
Craig
RE: Amavisd replacement suggestion
Posted by Martin Hepworth <ma...@solid-state-logic.com>.
Works fine with postfix...
http://wiki.mailscanner.info/doku.php?id=documentation:configuration:mta:pos
tfix:politics&s=politics
--
Martin Hepworth
Snr Systems Administrator
Solid State Logic
Tel: +44 (0)1865 842300
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Michael W Cocke [mailto:cocke@catherders.com]
> Sent: 07 March 2006 14:57
> To: spamassassin-users@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Amavisd replacement suggestion
>
> On Tue, 7 Mar 2006 14:10:26 -0000, you wrote:
>
> >Shane
> >
> >Have a look at MailScanner as an alternative to amavisd - it's nice to
> have
> >a choice isn't it..
>
> My understanding is that mailscanner doesn't work safely with postfix.
> (IIRC someone on this list told me that when I first encountered
> mailscanner and was going to switch from amavisd myself.)
>
> What problems are you having with amavisd? Since it's written in perl
> it's actually pretty straightforward to make mods to it.
>
> Mike-
> --
> If you're not confused, you're not trying hard enough.
> --
> Please note - Due to the intense volume of spam, we have installed
> site-wide spam filters at catherders.com. If email from you bounces,
> try non-HTML, non-encoded, non-attachments,
**********************************************************************
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and
intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they
are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify
the system manager.
This footnote confirms that this email message has been swept
for the presence of computer viruses and is believed to be clean.
**********************************************************************
Re: Amavisd replacement suggestion
Posted by Michael W Cocke <co...@catherders.com>.
On Tue, 7 Mar 2006 14:10:26 -0000, you wrote:
>Shane
>
>Have a look at MailScanner as an alternative to amavisd - it's nice to have
>a choice isn't it..
My understanding is that mailscanner doesn't work safely with postfix.
(IIRC someone on this list told me that when I first encountered
mailscanner and was going to switch from amavisd myself.)
What problems are you having with amavisd? Since it's written in perl
it's actually pretty straightforward to make mods to it.
Mike-
--
If you're not confused, you're not trying hard enough.
--
Please note - Due to the intense volume of spam, we have installed
site-wide spam filters at catherders.com. If email from you bounces,
try non-HTML, non-encoded, non-attachments,
RE: Amavisd replacement suggestion
Posted by Martin Hepworth <ma...@solid-state-logic.com>.
Shane
Have a look at MailScanner as an alternative to amavisd - it's nice to have
a choice isn't it..
--
Martin Hepworth
Snr Systems Administrator
Solid State Logic
Tel: +44 (0)1865 842300
> -----Original Message-----
> From: tsmullins@wise.k12.va.us [mailto:tsmullins@wise.k12.va.us]
> Sent: 07 March 2006 13:23
> To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
> Subject: Amavisd replacement suggestion
>
> We have been running Spamassassin for two years or so now. Spamassassin
> has been great. We run Postfix, Amavisd and Spamassassin. I really need
> some suggestions to replace Amavisd. I have two problems with Amavisd
> that I cannot seem to fix. Any recommendations on how to call
> Spamassassin would be welcome.
>
> Thanks
> Shane
>
>
>
**********************************************************************
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and
intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they
are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify
the system manager.
This footnote confirms that this email message has been swept
for the presence of computer viruses and is believed to be clean.
**********************************************************************