In article 4b5b45cb.8030...@redhat.com, Warren Togami
wtog...@redhat.com writes
We can use any ham, even without accompanying spam. The more variety of
sources of ham the better.
Just to clarify, I'm offering to run a nightly masscheck locally, I'll
never get permission to send this stuff
On 01/24/2010 05:47 AM, Kevin Golding wrote:
In article4b5b45cb.8030...@redhat.com, Warren Togami
wtog...@redhat.com writes
We can use any ham, even without accompanying spam. The more variety of
sources of ham the better.
Just to clarify, I'm offering to run a nightly masscheck locally,
Jan 22 13:10:01 talonjr spamd[8959]: spamd: handled cleanup of child pid
[8972] due to SIGCHLD: INTERRUPTED, signal 2 (0002)
Are these just more informative? Since a quick look of 3.2.5 shows the same
info() line, I'm worried that this isn't good. I had 0 of these before with
3.2.5 and
On 24/01/2010 1:23 PM, Thomas Schulz wrote:
Jan 22 13:10:01 talonjr spamd[8959]: spamd: handled cleanup of child pid
[8972] due to SIGCHLD: INTERRUPTED, signal 2 (0002)
Are these just more informative? Since a quick look of 3.2.5 shows the same
info() line, I'm worried that this isn't
I think in both Tom and Kevin's cases this is caused by their min-spares
and max-spares settings. Tom didn't show his settings, but Kevin's got
min-spares=5 and max-spares=6. That means that if two children finish
their work while another is being spawned, that new child is going to be
