On Sun, Dec 14, 2003 at 12:51:36AM +0100, T. Ribbrock wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 13, 2003 at 05:44:51PM -0600, Exile In Paradise wrote:
> [...]
> > Each rule ahead of the SA rule should have stop-processing just from a
> > performance standpoint... why keep spinning the cpu wheels when you
> > already know what the final disposition of the mail should be?
> > Yes, thanks for specifically bringing this up for people less used to
> > how Evolution processes.
> This isn't even Evolution-specific - the very same applies for a
> procmail setup, too. :-)
And if you DON'T put list filters before spam filters, this is what happens:
<quote>
From: SysAdmin <SysAdminATami.com>
To: "'T. Ribbrock'" <emgaronATgmx.net>
Subject: Undeliverable re: training spamassassin
Date: Sat, 13 Dec 2003 18:56:13 -0500
The message with the above subject was rejected by a SPAM filter.
Please remove all ami.com recipients from your list.
</quote>
ROFL... I assume it was the other mail from me with the scores in it...
Cheerio,
Thomas
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thomas Ribbrock http://www.ribbrock.org
"You have to live on the edge of reality - to make your dreams come true!"
