jared r r spiegel wrote:
On Tue, Nov 28, 2006 at 07:43:48PM -0500, Daniel Ouellet wrote:
Thanks for the update. I understand that. Not a complain what so ever,
but just a thought that may be the man page should include the default
of 800 to be also the max allow.
jmc@ took care of that 2w a
On Tue, Nov 28, 2006 at 07:43:48PM -0500, Daniel Ouellet wrote:
>
> Thanks for the update. I understand that. Not a complain what so ever,
> but just a thought that may be the man page should include the default
> of 800 to be also the max allow.
jmc@ took care of that 2w ago
--
jared
Bob Beck wrote:
spamd(8) says the default is 800, which is actually a compiled-in
limit and is quite generous for most situations. The consequences of
raising it are not immediately obvious, but I imagine could be
entertaining.
because if you go much beyond it you need to consider thing
> >spamd(8) says the default is 800, which is actually a compiled-in
> >limit and is quite generous for most situations. The consequences of
> >raising it are not immediately obvious, but I imagine could be
> >entertaining.
because if you go much beyond it you need to consider things like
Jon Simola wrote:
On 11/28/06, Daniel Ouellet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Is there a reason why it's not possible to start spamd with example
spamd -c 1000
in /usr/src/libexec/spamd/spamd.c:
#define MAXCON 800
Not a big deal, but I just couldn't do this.
spamd(8) says the default is 800, w
On 11/28/06, Daniel Ouellet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Is there a reason why it's not possible to start spamd with example
spamd -c 1000
in /usr/src/libexec/spamd/spamd.c:
#define MAXCON 800
Not a big deal, but I just couldn't do this.
spamd(8) says the default is 800, which is actually a
6 matches
Mail list logo
