[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: possible mass bug filing: spamassassin 3

On Oct 06, Andreas Barth <aba@not.so.argh.org> wrote:

> Sorry, but the basic problem I'm speaking about has nothing to do with
> volatile - but just that requiring substancially more memory might be a
> bad idea. We still have inn1 and inn2 parallel (and I'm a happy user of
> inn1), for similar reasons.
But the problem still stands: spamassassin 2.x should not be used
anymore because it's obsolete.
People should either work to reduce the memory usage of 3.x or switch to
a different filtering program.

ciao, |
Marco | [8385 ac29DiCFF88Ek]

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: