Marco Gaiarin wrote:
> Bob Proulx wrote:
> > I would not be opposed to an *option* to ignore all errors. But it
> > should not be the default.
>
> Only a little note, to say that after some more test seems that the
> ''offending'' command that have to be redirected are only two:
>
> -sa-
> I would not be opposed to an *option* to ignore all errors. But it
> should not be the default.
Only a little note, to say that after some more test seems that the
''offending'' command that have to be redirected are only two:
gaio@lily:~/conf/spamassassin$ diff -ud spamassassin.squeeze spama
Marco Gaiarin wrote:
> Bob Proulx wrote:
> > Please, one thread for each bug. This is a different problem and it
> > should have a different bug ticket.
>
> I consider the ''bug'' as: «squeeze /etc/cron.daily/spamassassin is a
> bit more verbose/annoying then lenny one», and sa-exim only a ''side
Mandi! Bob Proulx
In chel di` si favelave...
> Please, one thread for each bug. This is a different problem and it
> should have a different bug ticket.
I consider the ''bug'' as: «squeeze /etc/cron.daily/spamassassin is a
bit more verbose/annoying then lenny one», and sa-exim only a ''side
ef
I have two comments. The first being please do not mix bug reports.
The original bug report was regarding sa-exim and greylisting. I
don't know, that seems fine, I don't use exim so do not know, I never
saw that problem.
But this message is a patch for something completely different from
the abo
One more redirection, by some day, the update script emit:
http: GET http://daryl.dostech.ca/sa-update/asf/1387911.tar.gz request failed:
404 Not Found:
404 Not Found Not Found The requested
URL /sa-update/asf/1387911.tar.gz was not found on this server.
Apache/2.2.6 (Fedora) Server at d
6 matches
Mail list logo
