Re: [arch-general] ClamAV should be update to 0.93

2008-05-05 Thread Tino Reichardt
* Attila [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 On Sonntag, 4. Mai 2008 22:28 Tino Reichardt wrote:
 
  It isn't to hard. Its just the plain truth.
  
  If the maintainer hasn't the time, he should give the package to someone
  else, which has the time.
 
 Okay, if you reduce this only to maintaining than it could be true but i
 suggest to think this to the end and this means for me that every distro
 without a company in the backhand can't ensure fulltime maintaining.
 
 Sorry to say, but if you want a guarantee than you have to buy it. But perhaps
 i can't recognize the problem because i don't think that clamav is so a
 important package for archlinux.
 
 For me there be more ways than only to asking for an package update. Another
 option could be to make this update, runs it and send the maintainer an email

I asked that: Should I build a new package ?


 about the result. At this point it ends for the user and the devs itselfs
 have to look if there is a problem with maintaining or not.
 
  PS: I am not an admin of some important server which needs an update ;)
 
 Everybody of us here has root acount and so at the end we all be admins.-)

Admin of an important server != admin of some private notebook ;)


-- 
regards, TR


pgpUhvBp1jgZB.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Re: [arch-general] ClamAV should be update to 0.93

2008-05-05 Thread Attila
On Montag, 5. Mai 2008 08:12 Tino Reichardt wrote:

 I asked that: Should I build a new package ?

Sorry, i overread this.

 Admin of an important server != admin of some private notebook ;)

I want only to show that at the end everybody is an admin but okay i stop
joking.-)

See you, Attila




Re: [arch-general] ClamAV should be update to 0.93

2008-05-04 Thread Alessio Bolognino
On Sun 2008-05-04 12:47 , Tino Reichardt wrote:
 * pyther [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
   * Tino Reichardt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
   Hello list,
  
   clamav should be updated.
  
   Why does the update of clamav take so long ?
  
   Should I build a new package ?
   
  Because the developers have a life, if you need a new package use abs
  and compile it.
 
 If they don't have the time to be a maintainer for some package, they
 shouldn't be the maintainer of it!
 
 My time is also short and thats the reason why I am no trusted user or
 the maintainer of packages like clamav.

Being a security update it should be somewhat high priority, if the
maintainer didn't update it yet is because he simply don't have the time
to do so (and test it). 
Your whining is not helping anyone; bear in mind that the number of
devs/TUs is limited and they have to manage a huge number of packages.
If you want to help someway, you could update the package, test it and
send the sources (PKGBUILD and other stuff) to the maintainer or maybe
even in this mailing list.

tl;dr : STFU.

-- 
Alessio (molok) Bolognino

Please send personal email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Public Key http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch=0xFE0270FB
GPG Key ID = 1024D / FE0270FB 2007-04-11
Key Fingerprint = 9AF8 9011 F271 450D 59CF  2D7D 96C9 8F2A FE02 70FB


pgptQuCRFvEbS.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Re: [arch-general] ClamAV should be update to 0.93

2008-05-04 Thread Gerhard Brauer
On Sun, May 04, 2008 at 03:14:24PM +0200, solsTiCe d'Hiver wrote:
 when i try to use your PKGBUILD, i got this error

Sorry, but the attached PKGBUILD is only a replacement for the one in
the complete clamav makepkg-tarball.

Get the complete clamav directory from abs (/var/abs/extra/clamav/) and
replace the PKGBUILD there with mine.
Or do simply change: pkgver=0.92 to pkgver=0.93 in current PKGBUILD
(yes, that's all)
do a: makepkg -g  PKGBUILD and then a: makepkg

Sorry for confusing the world ;-)
Yes: a simple needed change and a rebuild could be sooo strong ;-)

Maybe we have a Dev with 10 minutes time for changing and rebuilding...

Gerhard

-- 
DSSP - Deutschland sucht den Super Papst
Casting mit Fliege



Re: [arch-general] ClamAV should be update to 0.93

2008-05-04 Thread Tino Reichardt
* Alessio Bolognino [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 On Sun 2008-05-04 12:47 , Tino Reichardt wrote:
  * pyther [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
* Tino Reichardt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello list,
   
clamav should be updated.
   
Why does the update of clamav take so long ?
   
Should I build a new package ?

   Because the developers have a life, if you need a new package use abs
   and compile it.
  
  If they don't have the time to be a maintainer for some package, they
  shouldn't be the maintainer of it!
  
  My time is also short and thats the reason why I am no trusted user or
  the maintainer of packages like clamav.
 
 Being a security update it should be somewhat high priority, if the
 maintainer didn't update it yet is because he simply don't have the time
 to do so (and test it). 

This exactly is the point! Versions before 0.92 are vulnerable, that
should be fixed, as soon as possible.


 Your whining is not helping anyone; bear in mind that the number of
 devs/TUs is limited and they have to manage a huge number of packages.
 If you want to help someway, you could update the package, test it and
 send the sources (PKGBUILD and other stuff) to the maintainer or maybe
 even in this mailing list.

I did not whine! I build it myself clamav by just replacing the $pkgver
on my private x86_64 box. I just wanted to call some attention.

But Arch Linux is known to be very up to date on nearly all packages.
Why not on that security realted issue ?


When clamav 0.94 is released, where should I upload the new PKGBUILD
including the binaries for x86_64 and i686 ?


Sorry for my english, it isn't the best :)


-- 
regards, TR


pgpc8ZBnGFu0j.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Re: [arch-general] ClamAV should be update to 0.93

2008-05-04 Thread pyther
 * Attila [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 On Sonntag, 4. Mai 2008 12:47 Tino Reichardt wrote:

  If they don't have the time to be a maintainer for some package, they
  shouldn't be the maintainer of it!

 For me this is definitely too hard. And unfair because archlinux is a
 distribution (as a lot of other too) which is managed by private individual
 for private individual.

 The devs of archlinux gives us with abs a perfect and easy understandable way
 to make in the most cases updates at the time we wants it. Irony on: That is
 why other distros with another package magagment needs fulltime
 maintaining.-)

 And to the argument of that clamav is a security update: This is only
 relevant for servers which have windows clients and in this case, sorry, this
 is at first the job of the admin of the server and opps this be you and not
 the maintainer of a package.

 It isn't to hard. Its just the plain truth.

 If the maintainer hasn't the time, he should give the package to someone
 else, which has the time.


 PS: I am not an admin of some important server which needs an update ;)


 --
 regards, TR

What if there are no other devs/maintainer? Maintainers have to be trusted, 
have to prove that they know what their
doing etc...

I wouldn't want someone random person from the community becoming a maintainer 
for a package or two, because you don't
know what he or she knows. I wouldn't want to install a pkg that wipes out my 
whole /usr dir by mistake.

Also if security is a big concern arch isn't probably the best distro to be 
using.



Re: [arch-general] ClamAV should be update to 0.93

2008-05-04 Thread Attila
On Sonntag, 4. Mai 2008 22:28 Tino Reichardt wrote:

 It isn't to hard. Its just the plain truth.
 
 If the maintainer hasn't the time, he should give the package to someone
 else, which has the time.

Okay, if you reduce this only to maintaining than it could be true but i
suggest to think this to the end and this means for me that every distro
without a company in the backhand can't ensure fulltime maintaining.

Sorry to say, but if you want a guarantee than you have to buy it. But perhaps
i can't recognize the problem because i don't think that clamav is so a
important package for archlinux.

For me there be more ways than only to asking for an package update. Another
option could be to make this update, runs it and send the maintainer an email
about the result. At this point it ends for the user and the devs itselfs
have to look if there is a problem with maintaining or not.

 PS: I am not an admin of some important server which needs an update ;)

Everybody of us here has root acount and so at the end we all be admins.-)

See you, Attila




Re: [arch-general] ClamAV should be update to 0.93

2008-05-03 Thread Tino Reichardt
* Tino Reichardt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 Hello list,
 
 clamav should be updated.

Why does the update of clamav take so long ?

Should I build a new package ?


-- 
regards, TR



Re: [arch-general] ClamAV should be update to 0.93

2008-04-18 Thread Hussam Al-Tayeb
On Wed, 2008-04-16 at 18:38 +0200, Tino Reichardt wrote:
 Hello list,
 
 clamav should be updated.
 
I filed a bug with the two CVE links for the two security issues fixed
by clamav 0.93 here http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/10214


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part


[arch-general] ClamAV should be update to 0.93

2008-04-16 Thread Tino Reichardt
Hello list,

clamav should be updated.

-- 
regards, TR


pgplsBCMitnUu.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Re: [arch-general] ClamAV should be update to 0.93

2008-04-16 Thread Hussam Al-Tayeb
On Wed, 2008-04-16 at 18:38 +0200, Tino Reichardt wrote:
 Hello list,
 
 clamav should be updated.
 

I read about this in the news today.
http://www.computerworlduk.com/technology/security-products/prevention/news/index.cfm?RSSnewsid=8536
0.93 fixes a security bug.

Tino Reichardt, can you please file a bug in bugs.archlinux.org?
Set Category to 'Security'

Regards,
Hussam Al-Tayeb


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part