On Thu, 27 May 2004 18:56:25 +0100, Nigel Horne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>That's because you've used the '-o' option to clamav-milter.
I'll buy that. Why does scanning outgoing mail do that?
--
Steve
---
This SF.Net email is sponsored
On Thursday 27 May 2004 16:23, Steven Stern wrote:
> >-lo --max-children=10 --noreject --dont-log-clean --server=localhost
> OK... more digging. The messages are in the clientmqueue and sent by the
> queuerunner sendmail process once an hour.
That's because you've used the '-o' option to clama
On Thursday 27 May 2004 15:03, Steven Stern wrote:
> Clamav-milter is catching viruses OK, but the ultimate recipient is not
> receiving any notice that there was an interception. What flag am I missing
> or misusing?
>
> -lo --max-children=10 --noreject --dont-log-clean --server=localhost
> loca
On Thu, 27 May 2004 09:03:14 -0500, Steven Stern
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Clamav-milter is catching viruses OK, but the ultimate recipient is not
>receiving any notice that there was an interception. What flag am I missing
>or misusing?
>
>-lo --max-children=10 --noreject --dont-log-clean --se
On Thu, 27 May 2004 09:03:14 -0500, Steven Stern
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Clamav-milter is catching viruses OK, but the ultimate recipient is not
>receiving any notice that there was an interception. What flag am I missing
>or misusing?
>
>-lo --max-children=10 --noreject --dont-log-clean --se
