After an evaluation, GNOME has moved from Bugzilla to GitLab. Learn more about GitLab.
No new issues can be reported in GNOME Bugzilla anymore.
To report an issue in a GNOME project, go to GNOME GitLab.
Do not go to GNOME Gitlab for: Bluefish, Doxygen, GnuCash, GStreamer, java-gnome, LDTP, NetworkManager, Tomboy.
Bug 354169 - Run only one spam filter process
Run only one spam filter process
Status: RESOLVED DUPLICATE of bug 268852
Product: evolution
Classification: Applications
Component: Mailer
2.6.x (obsolete)
Other Linux
: Normal normal
: ---
Assigned To: evolution-mail-maintainers
Evolution QA team
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
 
Reported: 2006-09-03 20:15 UTC by Behdad Esfahbod
Modified: 2006-09-12 11:36 UTC
See Also:
GNOME target: ---
GNOME version: ---



Description Behdad Esfahbod 2006-09-03 20:15:48 UTC
Evo should run a per-user spam filter daemon and reuse that to filter mail, instead of running tens of spamd processes that each apparently eat 30MB of non-shared memory and don't go away soon...
Comment 1 Behdad Esfahbod 2006-09-03 20:16:36 UTC
For reference, Frederic Crozat is telling me that I should run spamd as a system daemon, this should make sure you won't have too much spamd process on your system. (http://mces.blogspot.com/2006/09/evolution-4.html#comments)
Comment 2 Bastien Nocera 2006-09-03 20:49:37 UTC
Shouldn't the default rather be either a system-wide spamd (and making sure distributions get it right), or using the bogofilter plugin?
Comment 3 Frederic Crozat 2006-09-03 21:13:15 UTC
well, evolution is trying to use system spamd if it is already launched and will only start user spamd if system daemon is not running (and will fallback to spamassassin directly if spamd isn't available).
Comment 4 Behdad Esfahbod 2006-09-03 22:04:03 UTC
I'm not sure I see why it should be a system service.  Do we also need a system service for sorting mail, and one for  copying files, and what?   :)
Comment 5 Wayne Schuller 2006-09-04 02:32:59 UTC
wow this is a good bug report

evo should just do the right thing

most evo installs are via distros (my guess)

it should just work

between the evo tarballs and the distro packagers they can work it out

its not rocket science!
Comment 6 André Klapper 2006-09-04 06:31:12 UTC
sounds like a duplicate of bug 268852, heh?
Comment 7 Behdad Esfahbod 2006-09-05 00:59:09 UTC
(In reply to comment #6)
> sounds like a duplicate of bug 268852, heh?

Ah, looks like it, yes.
Comment 8 Poornima 2006-09-05 05:04:33 UTC

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 268852 ***