From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Aug 16 20:31:48 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 146EF16A4CE for ; Mon, 16 Aug 2004 20:31:48 +0000 (GMT) Received: from smtp.volant.org (gate.volant.org [207.111.218.246]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E511143D2D for ; Mon, 16 Aug 2004 20:31:47 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from patl@volant.org) Received: from 64-144-229-193.client.dsl.net ([64.144.229.193] helo=[192.168.0.22]) by smtp.volant.org with asmtp (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.34 (FreeBSD)) id 1Bwo8k-000DXx-MN; Mon, 16 Aug 2004 13:31:36 -0700 Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 13:31:38 -0700 From: Pat Lashley To: "Paul A. Hoadley" Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <20040816120713.GH26453@grover.logicsquad.net> References: <20040814230143.GB8610@grover.logicsquad.net> <20040814233234.GA56333@falcon.midgard.homeip.net> <20040815013954.GC25751@grover.logicsquad.net> <893994951.20040814211332@mygirlfriday.info> <78D3657555876AE17CEE2ECD@vanvoght.phoenix.volant.org> <20040816120713.GH26453@grover.logicsquad.net> X-Mailer: Mulberry/3.1.6 (Linux/x86) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline X-Scan-Signature: 106a317f3e33c1e32c9ba517d70ce429824ba71c X-Spam-User: nobody X-Spam-Score: -4.8 (----) X-Spam-Score-Int: -47 X-Spam-Report: This mail has matched the spam-filter tests listed below. See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for details about the specific tests reported. In general, the higher the number of total points, the more likely that it actually is spam. (The 'required' number of points listed below is the arbitrary number above which the message is normally considered spam.) Content analysis details: (-4.8 points total, 5.0 required) -4.9 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] 0.1 AWL AWL: Auto-whitelist adjustment cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: find -exec surprisingly slow X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 20:31:48 -0000 --On Monday, August 16, 2004 21:37:13 +0930 "Paul A. Hoadley" wrote: > On Sun, Aug 15, 2004 at 02:22:02PM -0700, Pat Lashley wrote: > >> Just FYI, Exim, with the ExiScan patches, can reject at SMTP time; >> and also has a 'fakereject' capability which tells the sender that >> the message has been rejected; but actually delivers it. > > Thanks for the info. I have been thinking of changing MTAs for a > while. I've been using Exim for years now, and in several widly varying installations. I can heartily recommend it as solid, flexable, and capable. And the config file is actually pretty easy to read even in complex or highly customized configurations. (Unlike a certain ancient but still inexplicably popular MTA...) The FreeBSD port automatically includes the semi-official ExiScan patchest which adds the ability to do SpamAssassin and anti-virus scanning while the SMTP connection is still open. The Exim mailing list has a pretty high signal-to-noise ratio; and the folks on it tend to be friendly and helpful. And there's very good on-line documentation at http://www.exim.org/ -Pat