On Wed, Nov 03, 2004 at 11:43:30AM -0500, Theo Van Dinter wrote: > On Wed, Nov 03, 2004 at 03:12:47PM +1300, Jason Haar wrote: > > It seems to me that could improve performance (a little bit) - a whole > > bunch of I/O could be skipped... > > It's the whole message. Most of the time spamc gets data from STDIN, so > there's no filename to pass. That also means no dealing with permissions,
Well - I'd say not really to that... I mean most SA installs are using it as part of a MTA (Qmail-Scanner, milter, etc) - so the calling process has the email on disk as a file, and then pipes it into spamc. Having spamc call a filename would remove a good chunk of IO. As far as perms go - yes you are right. But most MTAs using SA would be standalone - so having spamd running as the same userid as the MTA bits isn't much to ask. -- Cheers Jason Haar Information Security Manager, Trimble Navigation Ltd. Phone: +64 3 9635 377 Fax: +64 3 9635 417 PGP Fingerprint: 7A2E 0407 C9A6 CAF6 2B9F 8422 C063 5EBB FE1D 66D1
