* Attila <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Montag, 5. Mai 2008 08:12 Tino Reichardt wrote:
>
> > 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.-)
Okay, I am sorry too. I thought you meant thi
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
* 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 "maintai
On Montag, 5. Mai 2008 02:26 Uwe Vogt wrote:
> This is my criticism in the Archlinux Leadership. I think there must some
> changes, I will not shot Aaron, I mean Aaron needs some help in form from
> a Lead Engineer for "community/AUR" and for "development" how can
> organize this. Many User like
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 t
On Sun, 04 May 2008 16:10:31 -0700, pyther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
* 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
> * 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
>> distribut
* 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
* 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
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 i
Hello,
as attachement the **complete** clamav dir 0.93 for makepkg.
Tested on i686
//Edit: forgot the attachement, grrr ;-)
Gerhard
--
Bundestrojaner - wir sind die Guten!
Nur echt mit 52 Verfassungsbruechen!
clamav.tar.gz
Description: Binary data
Hello,
as attachement the **complete** clamav dir 0.93 for makepkg.
Tested on i686
Gerhard
--
Bundestrojaner - wir sind die Guten!
Nur echt mit 52 Verfassungsbruechen!
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
when i try to use your PKGBUILD, i got this error
/bin/sh ../libtool --tag=CC --mode=compile
gcc -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I.. -I.. -I./nsis -I./lzma -march=i686
-mtune=generic -O2 -pipe -MT
regerror.lo -MD -MP -MF .deps/regerror.Tpo -c -o regerror.lo
`test -f 'regex/regerror.c' || echo './'`re
On Sun, May 04, 2008 at 01:05:31PM +0200, Alessio Bolognino wrote:
> 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.
Here is my PKGBUILD for 0.93. I have tested it on two se
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 ?
> >
* 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 ?
> >
> >
> > --
> > regards, TR
> >
> >
> Because the developers have a
> * 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
>
>
Because the developers have a life, if you need a new package use abs and
compile it.
* 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
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 pa
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?RSS&newsid=8536
0.93 fixes a security bug.
Tino Reichardt, can you p
Hello list,
clamav should be updated.
--
regards, TR
pgplsBCMitnUu.pgp
Description: PGP signature
22 matches
Mail list logo
