On Thu, 3 Mar 2005 22:26:18 +, Brian Morrison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> You have not provided enough information for us to determine that, at
> the least the old and new versions of the Connectiva ClamAV packages are
> needed.
Announcement at
http://www.securityfocus.com/archive/1/392097
Stephen Gran wrote:
> So, I see the feasability, and the project may yet go that way, but I
> don't see that it would make upgrades any cleaner or easier,
> necessarily. I for one wouldn't want all of my production machines
> blindly upgrading to a new library version overnight, but maybe that's
On Thu, Mar 03, 2005 at 12:34:36PM +0100, Steffen Heil said:
> Hi
>
> > Then use a binary distribution. Then use a binary distribution.
> > Then use a binary distribution. Do you not get that this is already
> > being done? It is just not the job of the clamav development team.
> > I make and d
On Thu, 3 Mar 2005, Brian Morrison wrote:
> On Thu, 3 Mar 2005 13:24:54 -0600 (CST) in
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sam
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > So what's the poop on this? .83 fix this issue?
>
> You have not provided enough information for us to determine that, at
> the least the old and new
On Thu, 3 Mar 2005 13:24:54 -0600 (CST) in
[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sam
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So what's the poop on this? .83 fix this issue?
You have not provided enough information for us to determine that, at
the least the old and new versions of the Connectiva ClamAV packages are
needed.
--
So what's the poop on this? .83 fix this issue?
Thanks for a great product too! You guys rule!
Sam
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
-
--
CONECTIVA LINUX SECURITY ANNOUNCEMENT
-
---
>
>
> On Mar 03, 2005, at 10:22, Dennis Peterson wrote:
>
> > Dale Walsh said:
> >>
> >> On Mar 03, 2005, at 07:37, Matt Fretwell wrote:
> >
> >> A solution to this problem would be to force everyone to use the same
> >> build parameters, this would not only make maintenence easier, it
> >> wou
On Mar 03, 2005, at 10:22, Dennis Peterson wrote:
Dale Walsh said:
On Mar 03, 2005, at 07:37, Matt Fretwell wrote:
That is why human intervention is required to some degree. The idea
is
very basic and straight forward. The implemantation is not.
Matt
A solution to this problem would be to force
Nigel Horne said:
>> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Daniel J
>
>> > > Fine. I'd like all builds to be 64-bit starting today. No reason
>> that
>> > > should be a problem.
>> >
>> > Not if you buy me 64bit PPC, x86 and SPARC machines.
>>
>> What!? You aren't going to support my Tru-64 boxes us
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Daniel J
> > > Fine. I'd like all builds to be 64-bit starting today. No reason that
> > > should be a problem.
> >
> > Not if you buy me 64bit PPC, x86 and SPARC machines.
>
> What!? You aren't going to support my Tru-64 boxes using Alpha
> Processors! Waa
On Thu, 2005-03-03 at 15:30 +, Nigel Horne wrote:
> On Thursday 03 Mar 2005 15:22, Dennis Peterson wrote:
> > Dale Walsh said:
> > >
> > > On Mar 03, 2005, at 07:37, Matt Fretwell wrote:
> >
> > Fine. I'd like all builds to be 64-bit starting today. No reason that
> > should be a problem.
>
On Thursday 03 Mar 2005 15:22, Dennis Peterson wrote:
> Dale Walsh said:
> >
> > On Mar 03, 2005, at 07:37, Matt Fretwell wrote:
>
> >> That is why human intervention is required to some degree. The idea is
> >> very basic and straight forward. The implemantation is not.
> >>
> >>
> >> Matt
> >
>
Dale Walsh said:
>
> On Mar 03, 2005, at 07:37, Matt Fretwell wrote:
>> That is why human intervention is required to some degree. The idea is
>> very basic and straight forward. The implemantation is not.
>>
>>
>> Matt
>
> A solution to this problem would be to force everyone to use the same
> b
On Thu, Mar 03, 2005 at 03:31:57PM +0100, Giorgio Bellussi wrote:
> It seems to me they (symantec) registered a complex implementation of
> antivirus, comprising a vds engine, an intermediate language (P-code),
> an emulator and so on. So bad news?
Michael Schallop, director of intellectual prop
It seems to me they (symantec) registered a complex implementation of
antivirus, comprising a vds engine, an intermediate language (P-code),
an emulator and so on. So bad news?
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=/netahtml/srchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=6,
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Aiko Barz wrote:
> "Symantec has been granted U.S. patent number 6,851,057 for a system
> that enables the detection of complex viruses, worms, and spyware."
>
> http://www.symantec.com/press/2005/n050302.html
> http://www.heise.de/newsticker/meldung/
"Symantec has been granted U.S. patent number 6,851,057 for a system
that enables the detection of complex viruses, worms, and spyware."
http://www.symantec.com/press/2005/n050302.html
http://www.heise.de/newsticker/meldung/57016 (German)
Bye,
Aiko
--
Aiko Barz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Web: http:
On Mar 03, 2005, at 07:37, Matt Fretwell wrote:
Allori Lorenzo wrote:
I'm starting from another point of view.. i want to do a script that
can
understand how i first installed clamav (meaning what ./configure
options i used) and downloads th
Allori Lorenzo wrote:
> I'm starting from another point of view.. i want to do a script that can
> understand how i first installed clamav (meaning what ./configure
> options i used) and downloads the last clamav version untars it and
> comp
Hi
> Then use a binary distribution.
> Then use a binary distribution.
> Then use a binary distribution. Do you not get that this is
> already being done? It is just not the job of the clamav
> development team. I make and distibute binary packages for
> Debian.
I do. And it is your great w
En réponse à Trog <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Sorry, but my english is not very good, could you explain to me again
more simply ?
Another question is:
why in the clamav-db I cannot find any information on the fact that
this virus was removed of the database, cause when this problem
occured, I should have
I once said:
>>> A typical 170kB digest containing about 90 messages took 7 hours to
>>> scan and exploded to 3900MB!
Tomasz said:
>> The problem has been already fixed in CVS.
I said:
> I hope I'm wrong but having downloaded the "latest snapshot" yesterday and
> compiled it up I don't see any
On Thu, 2005-03-03 at 11:21 +0100, Xavier Poirier wrote:
>
> I had a problem theses days, look:
>
> In the Daily725 a Virus was submited and added to the clamav db list.
> Here is the concerning lines (extracted from clamav-db ML):
>
>
> So, my question here is :
>
> Where is this virus , w
I repost the message here if anyone as an idea of this problem that
seems strange to me.If there is no solution please tell me.
thanks again.
Hi clamav users,
I had a problem theses days, look:
In the Daily725 a Virus was submited and added to the clamav db list.
Here is the concerning lines (ex
Thanks a lot,
but i want to compile from sources... binaries are no good and rpms are good
for red-hat users :)
I'm starting from another point of view.. i want to do a script that can
understand how i first installed
clam
25 matches
Mail list logo
