Subject: Re: spamd (was Re: CVS commit: src/etc)
To: Peter Postma <email@example.com>
From: Jim Wise <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 04/12/2005 09:52:34
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On Tue, 12 Apr 2005, Peter Postma wrote:
>spamd is not pf-centric, as was mentioned before by martin.
>IIRC it can be used without pf(4).
Actually, although pfspamd can indeed be used without pf(4), it _is_
pf-centric. In particular, it's white- and grey-listing modes generate
kernel pf tables which can only currently be used by pf(4).
So sure it can be used without pf, but it a.) is `pf's spamd' (i.e. the
spamd which came with pf), and b.) is a pf-centric product.
So `pfspamd' should be just fine. `spamd' is not acceptable in any
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (NetBSD)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----