Craig R Hughes wrote: > Spamd is not a client of SA, it's a client of spamd, through the > well-define > SPAMD/SPAMC protocol.
I'm using the term client in the same sense that any procedure, or program that calls another procedure or program, is a client of the procedure or program it calls (from your response, I'm not clear that you understood this). In this sense, as far as whichever of the two - spamc or spamd - calls SA, they are SA clients. > Your web browser doesn't report the log messages of every > web server you visit, does it? I don't know, but as a client, it should be able to get it's log messages, and output them if it wants, or provide for you to tell it to. Anyway, aren't I arguing *your* point now - essentially that spamd should be "polite," (or at least provide facilities for such)? My initial thinking was in reaction to the idea of modifying a piece software so that it behaved "properly" relative to SA - I mean, if this were necessary in general, you'd have to go around modifying a lot of software to ensure such (ha, ha). And, in general, the proper thing instead, would be to modify SA. *But* since apparently there is such immediate access to spamd, there's no reason a "proper" "client/server" relationship can't be set up. Bryan -- Labor exploitation hurts us all - Sign the petition: http://www.zazona.com/h1bpetition/P/facts.html Proud ugly web site owner: http://www.wecs.com http://www.wecs.com/bio_ailinks.htm; http://www.wecs.com/spam.htm http://www.wecs.com/resume.htm _______________________________________________________________ Don't miss the 2002 Sprint PCS Application Developer's Conference August 25-28 in Las Vegas -- http://devcon.sprintpcs.com/adp/index.cfm _______________________________________________ Spamassassin-talk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk
