RE: [SAtalk] Okay. No Response on SpamProxy Question.... Now another

2002-02-01 Thread Tony Hoyle
> -Original Message- > From: Nels Lindquist [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: 01 February 2002 15:58 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [SAtalk] Okay. No Response on SpamProxy Question.... Now > another > > > Not sure how you'd manage this with

Re: [SAtalk] Okay. No Response on SpamProxy Question.... Now another

2002-02-01 Thread Greg Blakely
Thanks. Does anyone know if there's a precompiled Linux binary that has the milter hooks in it? - Original Message - From: "Nels Lindquist" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, February 01, 2002 9:57 AM Subject: Re: [SAtalk] Okay. No Res

Re: [SAtalk] Okay. No Response on SpamProxy Question.... Now another

2002-02-01 Thread Nels Lindquist
On 31 Jan 2002 at 23:04, Greg Blakely wrote: > I actually DO have spamassassin working with procmail, quite nicely, > thank you. > > But I have a situation where not all my received mail is for users homed > on that machine. Nor, for that matter, are they able to reach it via > NFS. > > Sinc

Re: [SAtalk] Okay. No Response on SpamProxy Question.... Now another

2002-02-01 Thread Greg Ward
On 31 January 2002, Greg Blakely said: > I actually DO have spamassassin working with procmail, quite nicely, > thank you. > > But I have a situation where not all my received mail is for users homed > on that machine. Nor, for that matter, are they able to reach it via > NFS. That's similar

[SAtalk] Okay. No Response on SpamProxy Question.... Now another

2002-01-31 Thread Greg Blakely
Hi folks. I'm the one who wrote the other day to ask if anyone had heard of the error I mentioned regarding SpamProxy, and the silence was deafening. So, I wrote to the author, and he'd not heard of anything like it. So, I'm left to ask a very BASIC question: I actually DO have spamassassin wo