Re: Intermittent spamc error

2006-12-19 Thread Jon Ribbens
Jon Armitage <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I solved the problem by simply making my filter not bother passing the > > message to spamc at all if it was over 200k. > > Yes, as I understand sa-exim, messages over 250K (the default in my case) > should not be passed to SA. That's why I'm wondering w

RE: Intermittent spamc error

2006-12-19 Thread Jon Armitage
> -Original Message- > From: Jon Ribbens [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > I solved the problem by simply making my filter not bother passing the > message to spamc at all if it was over 200k. > Yes, as I understand sa-exim, messages over 250K (the default in my case) should not be passed t

RE: Intermittent spamc error

2006-12-19 Thread Jon Armitage
> From: Sietse van Zanen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: 19 December 2006 14:54 > Subject: RE: Intermittent spamc error > Don't think that that is a problem SA, because on my sendmail set-up it works perfectly. Maybe a bug in the local_scan() > function? Thanks, Sietse, I

Re: Intermittent spamc error

2006-12-19 Thread Jon Ribbens
Sietse van Zanen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I have found the related Exim message... > > > > 2006-12-19 11:47:02 1GwdM9-0006Pd-35 local_scan() function timed out - > > message temporarily rejected (size 320896) > > > ... so maybe I've posted this to the wrong list. Sorry. > >Unfortuna

RE: Intermittent spamc error

2006-12-19 Thread Sietse van Zanen
Unfortunately I don't know exim, but it seems it cannot cope with SA not scanning / returning messages due to them bigger than the max msg size. Don't think that that is a problem SA, because on my sendmail set-up it works perfectly. Maybe a bug in the local_scan() function? Wouldn't hurt to po