> Thanks, that explains how we get to 'Address already in use'.
>
> This opens up a couple of questions:
>
> - creating a socket listening on '::' apparently does work
> (it is tested in the BEGIN phase, and reported by 'have PF_INET6'),
> but creating a socket listening on '::1' (i.e. a loopback
> Tom Schulz wrote:
>> I am not sure if this is a bug or a usage problem.
>>
>> I have been running spamd on Solaris 10 and Perl v5.8.9 for years,
>> starting
>> it with the command:
>> spamd -d -c -m 18 --min-spare=1 --max-spare=4 --syslog-socket=inet
>>
>> I upgraded Perl to v5.20.1 and instal
I am not sure if this is a bug or a usage problem.
I have been running spamd on Solaris 10 and Perl v5.8.9 for years, starting
it with the command:
spamd -d -c -m 18 --min-spare=1 --max-spare=4 --syslog-socket=inet
I upgraded Perl to v5.20.1 and installed the current modules. When I
try to start
> On 30 Aug 2007, at 16:55, Micke Andersson wrote:
>
> > Richard Hobbs wrote:
> >> Hello,
> >>
> >> To add information to this problem, it appears that spamd does
> >> eventually give up after 5 minutes - which then bounces the
> >> message back
> >> to the sender stating:
> >>
> >> 421 SMTP i
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Thomas Schulz) writes:
>
> > I tried sending a report to [EMAIL PROTECTED] some 3 days ago, but nothing
> > has happened.
>
> Of course nothing has happened. Apache is an organization of hundreds
> of people, that address has nothing
Does anyone know the email address of the correct person to report problems
with the Apache mailing list archives? The mailing list archives have been
sick for over a week. Fortunately the MARC archives have come back to life.
I tried sending a report to [EMAIL PROTECTED] some 3 days ago, but not
> Martin Hepworth wrote:
>
> > Another reason
> [snip]
> > I shall be sticking to 2.64 for the forsee-able future as 3.02 gives me
> > no advantage and quite a high likelihood of more spam dropping through
> > the system!
Well, some rules do have reduced scores, but there have been rules adde
