• Bug#195948: dspam packaging status?

    From Tommi Virtanen@1:229/2 to All on Fri Aug 20 10:10:08 2004
    From: [email protected]

    Hi. What's the status on this? I'm a DD and I'm really interested in
    making dspam and postfix work.


    --
    To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected]
    with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
  • From =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jos=E9_Luis_Tall=F3n@1:229/2 to Tommi Virtanen on Fri Aug 20 13:20:12 2004
    From: [email protected]

    Tommi Virtanen wrote:

    Hi. What's the status on this? I'm a DD and I'm really interested in
    making dspam and postfix work

    Apart from the fact that i have been much busier than i ever thought
    possible, DSPAM2 was really suitable for packaging without major
    patching: upstream insists in selecting operating mode at compile-time
    instead of using command line switches.
    DSPAM 3.1 is very promising in this respect. A couple people have
    offered some help, so we can probably get this done very soon after
    Sarge is released.
    Your help with packaging is more than welcome. I am a heavy Postfix user
    myself too.


    Once Sarge is completely frozen (i mean, optional too), i will set-up a
    mini mailing list including all who have make suggestions and will
    finally get everything done: it is has yet to be decided the exact final partitioning of the package, but is seems that libdspam<soname>, dspam (containing the agent and tools) and libdspam-{sqlite,mysql,postgresql}
    are the bare minimum (BDB is reported to have problems lately)

    Will try to keep you informed.
    Thanks for your interest.


    --
    To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected]
    with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)