; Again - Be carefull - NEVER do that on a production system, as long as you
> do not know that it save to do it !
>
> The signal handling on nix is more clear than on Windows - the action on
> Windows could be unexpected or some times the signal is not sent! For
> example the kill(
>> Thomas; does the URIBL weitghting work like the DNSBL now ?
> Sorry - no. It is not so easy to do - but you'll find it in the
> release notes, if it is finished.
No problem and no hurry, mind me; I was just asking so that I
could eventually test it, see I've a custom uribl ready for testing
a
highes weight first ?
Thomas
Von:"GrayHat"
An: "ASSP development mailing list"
Datum: 17.05.2010 08:34
Betreff: Re: [Assp-test] fixes in 2.0.2_1.1.06
> Hi all,
>
> fixed in 2.0.2_1.1.06
>
> - a domain defined in 'URIBLWL' and '
> Hi all,
>
> fixed in 2.0.2_1.1.06
>
> - a domain defined in 'URIBLWL' and 'URIBLNP' was skipped if it was
> found in the body of the mail - but it was not skipped if it was the
> senders domain
> - some times an unexpected SIG TERM where found in workers if ASSP got
> a SIG TERM
Thomas; does the
han on Windows - the action on
Windows could be unexpected or some times the signal is not sent! For
example the kill(0.$pid) does not work on Windows.
Thomas
Von:K Post
An: ASSP development mailing list
Datum: 16.05.2010 20:59
Betreff:Re: [Assp-test] fixes in 2.0.2_1.1.06
"- some times an unexpected SIG TERM where found in workers if ASSP got a
SIG TERM"
Do you think that might be what I was seeing sporatically in at the
end of my rebuilds?
On Sun, May 16, 2010 at 7:15 AM, Thomas Eckardt
wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> fixed in 2.0.2_1.1.06
>
> - a domain defined in 'URIBL
Hi all,
fixed in 2.0.2_1.1.06
- a domain defined in 'URIBLWL' and 'URIBLNP' was skipped if it was found
in the body of the mail - but it was not skipped if it was the senders
domain
- some times an unexpected SIG TERM where found in workers if ASSP got a
SIG TERM
added:
'POP3KeepRejected',
