Re: is evolution really dependent on spamassassin?
- From: "Michael A. Peters" <mpeters@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 01 Jan 2006 03:35:39 -0800
On Sun, 2006-01-01 at 04:36 +1030, Tim wrote:
> On Sat, 2005-12-31 at 11:01 -0500, Amadeus W. M. wrote:
>
> > I haven't checked, but I bet there must be a compile option in the
> > evolution source that allows you to disable spamassassin. If I really
> > wanted to get rid of spamassassin, I'd download the evolution src.rpm,
> > hack it, change the spec file and rebuild it. But probably not worth
> > the trouble.
>
> I'm considering it, because it's taking ages for filtering to complete
> (nothing elaborate, either), and I'm registering DNS look-ups for all
> the addresses in messages.
spamassassin is not a compiled option.
You can nodeps remove it.
rpm --nodeps -e spamassassin
It is required because evolution uses it if you ask evolution to filter
for spam. If you don't ask evolution to filter for spam, it doesn't take
much disk space and doesn't do anything.
I doubt it is spamassassin slowing things down for you if you aren't
doing any spam checking in your filtering.
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
- Prev by Date: Re: XFS file system
- Next by Date: Re: is evolution really dependent on spamassassin?
- Previous by thread: Re: is evolution really dependent on spamassassin?
- Next by thread: Re: is evolution really dependent on spamassassin?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
|
