From: "Matt Kettler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, 2007, October 26 20:19
Daryl C. W. O'Shea wrote:
Justin Mason wrote:
OK, we really need to figure out some way to kill these FAQs off. Every
week, someone asks a question about why SpamAssassin is killing their
server, and most of the time the answer is "stop using blacklist.cf and
blacklist-uri.cf". If 1 person is asking the question, chances are
there's another 10 people who aren't asking, and who are just ditching
SpamAssassin entirely. :(
I think I'll add a new question right on the top of the FAQ list
about this...
What else can we do?
Has anyone asked Bill to stop distributing the blacklist in a format
suitable for direct use with SpamAssassin? That, to me, seems to be
the most effective and sensible way to deal with it.
I'd agree there.
Modifying the software, as has been discussed, seems a little
extreme to me.
I dono, I think that having some --lint warnings generated when the
overall config is really absurdly large seems useful for this kind of
problem in general. A basic "um, dude, that's a lot of config, are you
sure your server can handle this" might be a good thing. You never know
when someone else might make a sa-blacklist, or some tool that
auto-generates rules might get popular and get out-of-control
sometimes.. etc..
However, the whole idea of having it kill SA is way out-of-bounds, IMHO.
SA won't even do that if you feed it a conf file full of output from
/dev/random...
The problem there, Matt, is that the definition of absurdly large varies
greatly with application.
{^_-}
