On 2006-11-03, Jason R. Mastaler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I will say though that I do not want to add any more checking code to > tmda-filter, because that file is essentially byte-compiled and loaded > every time an incoming message invokes it.
Right, and on top of that it has to fork a sub-process. So, yeah I can see that it's already at its limit. > I'd much rather see tmda-check-address extended. Perhaps '-M' should > even be moved there from tmda-filter. Can you dig it? Yes, I think so. But I also think adding this to tmda-check-address is going to be more work than adding it to tmda-filter. I basically need to recreate tmda-filter in tmda-check-address so that the latter can handle all of the same contingencies that the former handles. What would help me is if I moved some of the functions in tmda-rfilter into a module. Can I try tackling that, too or is that a bigger problem than it seems? _________________________________________________ tmda-workers mailing list ([email protected]) http://tmda.net/lists/listinfo/tmda-workers
