Re: [clamav-users] daily database broken again
Nathan Gibbs wrote: > I am not aware of the team issuing a new major version number that they > then break in a few months with a new major version update. 0.95.x was the latest version less than a year ago. To me, it seems a little soon to EOL it. > At some point the end user has to accept his/her responsibility for keeping their machines properly updated. I am not talking about every day, but at least every few months, Agreed. six at most, That is a good way to do it. That is also your policy/opinion. It may not work for someone else. a user should inventory their system and take appropriate maintenance. To expect others to waste valuable time in developing a product and keeping it fully compatible with older versions is ludicrous. Agreed. Supporting 0.94.x or earlier now would be a waste of resources. I did feel bad for the 0.94x and 0.93x users who got caught in last years flag day, but it was a flag day what are you gonna do. Those running 0.92x or older, IMNSHO were just plain stupid and got what they deserved. But I do realize that it is just my not so humble opinion, and they just might have had good reasons for running software that old. "If you blame others for your failures, do you credit them with your success?" Thats an unsafe question to answer. No matter how its answered, you shoot yourself in the foot. Its like "Have you quit beating your wife?" Yes - You were beating her. No - You are beating her. The failures are usually all mine. The successes usually involve other people. And attribution is always the right way. Open Source wouldn't work otherwise. :-) Thanks Nathan for articulating what I suspect quite a lot of us think. I too am grateful to the ClamAV team - but I also sometimes think their attitude to users "lacks sensitivity" at times. -- Simon Hobson Visit http://www.magpiesnestpublishing.co.uk/ for books by acclaimed author Gladys Hobson. Novels - poetry - short stories - ideal as Christmas stocking fillers. Some available as e-books. ___ Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide: visit http://wiki.clamav.net http://www.clamav.net/support/ml
Re: [clamav-users] daily database broken again
Il 01/03/2011 08:59, Simon Hobson ha scritto: I too am grateful to the ClamAV team - but I also sometimes think their attitude to users "lacks sensitivity" at times. I agree. Upgrading may depends on a lot of steps, which may be not easy to repeat sometimes, and which may be delayed to better times. It would be great if * freshclam does not download new virus database if it is incompatible with installed version (or download it in temporary directory, and enable it only if clamd works with it) * clamd skips new unknown signs, without exiting, and keeps working with recognized signatures (clamd must never shutdown). Regards, Tonino -- Inter@zioniInterazioni di Antonio Nati http://www.interazioni.it to...@interazioni.it ___ Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide: visit http://wiki.clamav.net http://www.clamav.net/support/ml
Re: [clamav-users] daily database broken again
* Christoph Moench-Tegeder wrote: > Hi, > > just an idea for those insisting on running old versions: After some > simple tests I believe it's possible to get your own "database check" > even on versions older than 0.96.x (4?). Have freshclam update the > signatures into a testing directory, not the "real" clamav database dir > (that's what DatabaseDirectory in freshclam.conf is for). Use the > OnUpdateExecute hook to run a custom check-and-copy script (I'm certain > it will contain clamscan -d) to check the signatures, copy them to the > "real" database dir and signal clamd. There might be something to that idea. If someone implements it, I'll consider adding it to CLUES and or CCEE. -- Sincerely, Nathan Gibbs Systems Administrator Christ Media http://www.cmpublishers.com signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide: visit http://wiki.clamav.net http://www.clamav.net/support/ml
Re: [clamav-users] daily database broken again
On 02/28/2011 09:29 AM, Nathan Gibbs wrote: * Török Edwin wrote: but apparently people running 0.95 care more about clamd "working" than actually detecting malware. 0.95 working equals more protection than 0.95 not working. I will concede that its not the best solution, but its better than no solution. My opinion on reasonable backwards compatibility ( probably not worth much ) 2-3 years of backwards compatibility sounds right. 2 years would put us back to 0.94x 3 years would put us back to 0.92x A flag day now and then (0.94.x DB issue) is OK, but not as a regularly scheduled event. Whats the point of putting the latest Clamav on a system when the Dev team is going to break it in a matter of months. If I wanted that experience I'd use MS products exclusively. :-) I do appreciate the efforts of the ClamAV Team in providing a viable Open Source AV Solution. But as I've said before, the treatment of the user base leaves somewhat to be desired. Well please do not take this as freedom to start another flame war. Version 0.95 will stay working essentially forever if you choose to turn off freshclam. You will continue to detect the viruses that it detects. Version 0.96 updated the detections to keep up with the malware writers. Should the malware writers decide to take time off to allow everybody to upgrade to the latest version that would be great, however, that seems very unlikely. -- Jim Preston ___ Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide: visit http://wiki.clamav.net http://www.clamav.net/support/ml
