On 12/2/03 3:20 PM, "Kenneth Porter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> --On Tuesday, December 02, 2003 10:57 AM +0900 alan premselaar
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> vi ~/.procmail (and add appropriate config lines to call spamassassin or
>> spamc)
>> chkconfig spamd on
>> se
On Mon, 01 Dec 2003 22:20:42 -0800
Kenneth Porter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Granted, that first one can be tricky if you don't RTFM. i'm pretty sure
> > even the SpamAssassin RPM includes readme files. not sure where they are?
rpm has many nifty features. One of them is the list option, wh
--On Tuesday, December 02, 2003 10:57 AM +0900 alan premselaar
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> vi ~/.procmail (and add appropriate config lines to call spamassassin or
> spamc)
> chkconfig spamd on
> service spamd start
Instead of chkconfig, one could also use ntsysv (console graphics) or tksysv
(X
On 12/1/03 11:39 PM, "Graham Murray" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Logan Harbaugh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> I had to locate the RPM on the RedHat disks, install the package,
>> then go back and then install the dependencies that hadn't been
>> installed in the first plac
Graham Murray wrote:
> Would it not have been a lot simpler to just done
>
> #perl -MCPAN -e shell;
> cpan> install Mail::SpamAssassin
>
> which is the 'standard' way of installing almost any Perl based
> package?
Among other reasons, it doesn't play nicely with package managers.
Debian and the
On Mon, Dec 01, 2003 at 02:39:29PM +, Graham Murray wrote:
> "Logan Harbaugh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > I had to locate the RPM on the RedHat disks, install the package,
> > then go back and then install the dependencies that hadn't been
> > installed in the first place. Then I had to
"Logan Harbaugh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I had to locate the RPM on the RedHat disks, install the package,
> then go back and then install the dependencies that hadn't been
> installed in the first place. Then I had to go through the
> documentation and see what files needed to be changed an
Title: RE: [SAtalk] Re: An Open Letter to the SA-talk forum
Ken,
I think that the reason you can't imagine it taking longer than five minutes to install is that you've done it a few times. I'm a reviewer, not a full-time Linux administrator, and don't have enough time
requires a
lot of thought and planning.
Richard
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kenneth
Porter
Sent: Wednesday, November 26, 2003 8:49 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [SAtalk] Re: An Open Letter to the SA-talk f
BTW, Logan, can you say (on the list, use "reply all") why it took an hour
to install SA? I can imagine it taking me that long only because I'm very
careful and look at the installation scripts to make sure nothing will
break my existing setup. That option of course doesn't exist with closed
so
Title: RE: [SAtalk] Re: An Open Letter to the SA-talk forum
I'd say that there's little difference between my saying that SA 2.44 is not as good as commercial products without noting that it's an out of date version and saying that I'm a poor journalist because you disa
gt; From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:spamassassin-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Justin Mason
> Sent: Tuesday, November 25, 2003 10:32 PM
> To: Dan Wilder; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Logan Harbaugh
> Subject: Re: [SAtalk] Re: An Open Letter to the SA-talk forum
>
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Dan Wilder writes:
>On Tue, Nov 25, 2003 at 06:04:13PM -0600, Scott A Crosby wrote:
>> To everyone here, give the guy a break.
>
>Hear, hear!
>
>It's all too easy to make a mistake in print. Give Logan
>some slack for being professional enough to st
- Original Message -
From: "Scott A Crosby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Logan Harbaugh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, November 26, 2003 1:26 AM
Subject: [SAtalk] Re: An Open Letter to the SA-talk forum
> But to everyone else bitching about how SA and Perl is e
On Tue, 2003-11-25 at 19:04, Scott A Crosby wrote:
> To everyone here, give the guy a break.
Seconded! He gave an honest and unemotional response to what are surely
a huge number of (probably less than unemotional) responses to his
review. I daresay that he'll be a little more careful next time
On 25 Nov 2003, Scott A Crosby wrote:
> But to everyone else bitching about how SA and Perl is easy to install
> and 'not a problem'. You're wrong. Unlike the other systems reviewed
> SA isn't a drop-in system or box. It *does* require more effort to set
> up. Stop maligning him for claiming other
On Tue, Nov 25, 2003 at 06:04:13PM -0600, Scott A Crosby wrote:
> To everyone here, give the guy a break.
Hear, hear!
It's all too easy to make a mistake in print. Give Logan
some slack for being professional enough to step forward
and admit it. And some extra points for being willing to
join
17 matches
Mail list logo
