al Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kai
MacTane
Sent: Wednesday, July 09, 2003 4:12 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re[2]: [SAtalk] Attachment Checks
At 7/9/03 04:21 PM , Abigail Marshall wrote:
>I'm glad that it doesn't happen to you, Sim
At 16:21 9/07/03 -0700, Abigail Marshall wrote:
>> both because it is inefficient and because
>>viruses often have very large binary attachments which can
>>cause SA to crash with an out of memory error, and let the
SB> Huh ? Never had that happen to me. I use the default max scanning size of
SB>
At 7/9/03 04:21 PM , Abigail Marshall wrote:
I'm glad that it doesn't happen to you, Simon. It happens to
lots of other people. I can't reliably run Spamassassin on
files over 30K, much less 100K. This probably depends on
individual system configuration, as well as other programs
and load on an in
>> both because it is inefficient and because
>>viruses often have very large binary attachments which can
>>cause SA to crash with an out of memory error, and let the
SB> Huh ? Never had that happen to me. I use the default max scanning size of
SB> 256KB with spamc/spamd and I've never had a pr
