note: I don't use mailscanner, so am only relaying what I saw on the postfix list.
My understanding (based on foggy memory - search the list archives for a better answer) is that MailScanner dipped into postfix queues using either undocumented postfix APIs or by bypassing postfix entirely and directly manipulating files on disk. This led to instances of documented mail loss. Wietse therefore said that it wasn't safe to use. I've also recently read (I believe also on the postfix list, but am not sure) that MailScanner has remedied this behavior, and that it is now safe to use with postfix, but you'll need to confirm for yourself if that is true. Kurt | -----Original Message----- | From: Jeff Chan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] | Sent: Friday, October 27, 2006 06:54 | To: SpamAssassin Users | Subject: MailScanner versus Amavisd-new with postfix | | | Not to start any flamewars, but does anyone have strong opinions | on MailScanner versus Amavisd-new for use with postfix (and of | course SpamAssassin and ClamAV)? | | In the old days it seemed Amavisd-new may have integrated better | with postfix, but is that no longer the case? Some folks say | MailScanner is faster and leaner. | | What gives? | | Jeff C. | -- | Jeff Chan | mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.surbl.org/ |
