Dennis Peterson wrote:
The question wasn't directed to my but I'd like to see them be more
selective as to who should be allowed to use this product. Maybe an
IQ test.
Really that is an insulting statement - and completely un called for.
It's exactly the sort of attitude that drives people a
On 19/04/2010, at 10:26 PM, Török Edwin wrote:
> Try this:
> cd libclamav/c++
> make CalcSpillWeights.lo CXXFLAGS=-save-temps
>
> You should get a CalcSpillWeights.ii
>
> Open a bugreport and attach it.
>
> Best regards,
> --Edwin
For all those interested in getting 0.96 to compile under Mac O
On 4/19/10 1:17 PM, Dan wrote:
Really, a mission-critical
product such as ClamAV needs to be watched by the sysadmin, not left for
someone else to do it for you.
You've passed the IQ test.
Next.
dp
___
Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide: vi
On 4/19/10 9:22 AM, Jim Preston wrote:
But on a more serious note, what method would you like to have had them
take to make you aware of the impending failure?
The question wasn't directed to my but I'd like to see them be more selective as
to who should be allowed to use this product. Maybe
On Apr 19, 2010, at 4:11 PM, Andy Loates wrote:
On 19/04/2010 21:34, Jim Preston wrote:
On Apr 19, 2010, at 12:26 PM, Andy Loates wrote:
[Snip]
From previous experiences going back to FC3 the Clamav package is
only updated by the Fedora Team when there is a new release ie FC13.
The FC12
On Apr 19, 2010, at 4:11 PM, Andy Loates wrote:
On 19/04/2010 21:34, Jim Preston wrote:
On Apr 19, 2010, at 12:26 PM, Andy Loates wrote:
[Snip]
From previous experiences going back to FC3 the Clamav package is
only updated by the Fedora Team when there is a new release ie FC13.
The FC12
On 19/04/2010 21:34, Jim Preston wrote:
On Apr 19, 2010, at 12:26 PM, Andy Loates wrote:
[Snip]
From previous experiences going back to FC3 the Clamav package is
only updated by the Fedora Team when there is a new release ie FC13.
The FC12 package is currently stuck on 0.95.3.
Andy
And
On Apr 19, 2010, at 12:26 PM, Andy Loates wrote:
On 19/04/2010 19:41, Clovis Tristao wrote:
Hi *all,
How do i do to install 0.96 version using yum in Fedora 12?
Thanks a lot,
Clóvis
From previous experiences going back to FC3 the Clamav package is
only updated by the Fedora Team when the
At 7:08 PM +0200 4/19/2010, aCaB wrote:
Paul Reading wrote:
I am using OSX Server 10.4.11 and it is at least five years old and the
latest version of Snow Leopard server includes a more recent version of
clamav. I assumed that the use of clamav was negotiated by Apple and
Clamav and that the
On 19/04/2010 19:41, Clovis Tristao wrote:
Hi *all,
How do i do to install 0.96 version using yum in Fedora 12?
Thanks a lot,
Clóvis
From previous experiences going back to FC3 the Clamav package is only
updated by the Fedora Team when there is a new release ie FC13.
The FC12 package is c
Hi Edwin,
I discovered the cause after noticing that disabling of the freshclam and clamd
daemons had no effect. I am running ISPConfig v2.3.0 (release date 2009-03-19)
which did not contain a recent version of clamav (v0.88). I must have been
unfortunate since a next release (2.2.31) apparentl
Hi all,
I concur with this. I normally keep my system in a fairly good state of
maintenance, including updating Debian stable packages. That didn't work this
time, resulting in a very unstable server for days in a row (indeed I'm not a
full time sysadmin, but not a first day Linux user either).
Hi *all,
How do i do to install 0.96 version using yum in Fedora 12?
Thanks a lot,
Clóvis
--
Clovis Tristao - UNICAMP/Faculdade de Engenharia Agricola
Administrador de Redes - Secao de Informatica (SINFO)
E-mail: clo...@feagri.unicamp.br http://www.feagri.unicamp.br
Fone(0xx19) 35211031-3521103
Eric Rostetter wrote:
Let's look at this from the OS "community" point of view...
...
I thought, yeah, I
can live with that. That won't impact me in any real way. I don't have
a problem with that. I didn't think about others. I didn't try to come
up with other solutions. I didn't try to
On Apr 19, 2010, at 11:30 AM, Jim Preston wrote:
Jim
OK, I will rephrase the question, Did you get Clamav working so your
email server is running or ... are you still having problems?
Jim
Never mind. I see in later post you are up and running, glad to
hear that.
Jim
On Apr 19, 2010, at 10:40 AM, Paul Reading wrote:
I didn't try 0.96 as other people said it wouldn't work.
Paul.
On 19 Apr 2010, at 18:26, Jim Preston wrote:
On Apr 19, 2010, at 7:34 AM, Paul Reading wrote:
This morning all our office email was blocked by the ceasing of
0.94, the resul
Yes, and most likely the case and most likely the managers screaming
that it should not have failed because they did not authorize the
server to fail. And yes this a weak attempt at humor on my part and
not in need of retort.
Not so weak - but it sounds like you've met some of my past managers
Thanks Chuck, I am just a guy running a light bulb wholesaling business.
It took me all day to work out how to install 0.95.3. I am now happy
because it works. I know the instructions said to set gcc to 4.0 (but
that was default) but the thing is I don't know what gcc is and
certainly do n
Hi, all--
On Apr 19, 2010, at 9:59 AM, Paul Reading wrote:
> I am using OSX Server 10.4.11 and it is at least five years old and the
> latest version of Snow Leopard server includes a more recent version of
> clamav. I assumed that the use of clamav was negotiated by Apple and Clamav
> and that
I didn't try 0.96 as other people said it wouldn't work.
Paul.
On 19 Apr 2010, at 18:26, Jim Preston wrote:
On Apr 19, 2010, at 7:34 AM, Paul Reading wrote:
This morning all our office email was blocked by the ceasing of
0.94, the result was hundreds of stuck mail. Before I tried to run
aCaB wrote:
Paul Reading wrote:
I am using OSX Server 10.4.11 and it is at least five years old and the
latest version of Snow Leopard server includes a more recent version of
clamav. I assumed that the use of clamav was negotiated by Apple and
Clamav and that there would have been some direct c
On Apr 19, 2010, at 7:34 AM, Paul Reading wrote:
This morning all our office email was blocked by the ceasing of
0.94, the result was hundreds of stuck mail. Before I tried to run
the install I ran a software update and was not prompted to download
the latest version of xcode so I assumed
Paul Reading wrote:
> I am using OSX Server 10.4.11 and it is at least five years old and the
> latest version of Snow Leopard server includes a more recent version of
> clamav. I assumed that the use of clamav was negotiated by Apple and
> Clamav and that there would have been some direct contact.
I am using OSX Server 10.4.11 and it is at least five years old and
the latest version of Snow Leopard server includes a more recent
version of clamav. I assumed that the use of clamav was negotiated by
Apple and Clamav and that there would have been some direct contact.
The Apple boards of
On Mon, Apr 19, 2010 at 17:34, Paul Reading
wrote:
> Sorry to but-in.. I have just wasted a day trying to get my companies mail
> working again. We have an Apple xServe and knew nothing about clamav until
> we stopped receiving our email this morning. I don't know how you could have
> communicated
Sorry to but-in.. I have just wasted a day trying to get my companies
mail working again. We have an Apple xServe and knew nothing about
clamav until we stopped receiving our email this morning. I don't know
how you could have communicated with us on this one but perhaps it
would have been
On Apr 19, 2010, at 9:29 AM, Eric Rostetter wrote:
Quoting Simon Hobson :
Let's look at this from the OS "community" point of view...
We on this mailing list are part of the clamav open source
community...
As such, it is not clamav who failed, but it is us, the clamav
open source community,
Quoting Simon Hobson :
Let's look at this from the OS "community" point of view...
We on this mailing list are part of the clamav open source community...
As such, it is not clamav who failed, but it is us, the clamav
open source community, who failed...
When clamav asked about doing this, we f
Jim Preston wrote:
Yes, we all know that something had to be done, but just two days
ago, the argument most definitely was that there was **NO** other
option - absolutely no other option and this was the **ONLY** way
to do it.
Now you at least are coming round to the acceptance that there we
> 2) If it aint broke - don't fix it. There's no way I'd attempt a
major upgrade in-place when it's a live server used 24*7. For
various
internal reasons (which I'm sure you can guess) I don't have the
resources to do anything but an in-place upgrade if I want to
upgrade.
Well if they don't
On Apr 19, 2010, at 9:00 AM, Simon Hobson wrote:
Jim Preston wrote:
Forcing an upgrade by flipping a kill switch was AN option, but it
wasn't the only one.
No one is arguing that there weren't other options. However, it was
their decision to make to move forward with incompatible signatur
Jim Preston wrote:
Forcing an upgrade by flipping a kill switch was AN option, but it
wasn't the only one.
No one is arguing that there weren't other options. However, it was
their decision to make to move forward with incompatible signatures
to support new features. Code changes were put in
On 2010-04-19 18:29, Tommaso Basilici wrote:
>
> So my question is: are they aware of the EOL? are they aware of the
> killer-switch policy in act? can we help anyhow if the answer is no?
Yes, look at bugs.debian.org/clamav, the clamav-volatile list, or
debian-security list.
All of these places h
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Paul Whelan wrote:
> On 19 Apr 2010 at 16:17, Tommaso Basilici wrote:
>
>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>> I'm probably not fitting in the right place of the thread but I just
>> signed in and could not know where to start.
>> Ou
This morning all our office email was blocked by the ceasing of 0.94,
the result was hundreds of stuck mail. Before I tried to run the
install I ran a software update and was not prompted to download the
latest version of xcode so I assumed I had the latest version.
Unfortunately I had 2.
> Hi!
>
> Solved ... Here the details:
> https://wwws.clamav.net/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1950
>
> Thanks to Török Edwin, aCaB and the ClamAV Team!
>
> Upgrading zlib to 1.2.4 I've solved the problem,
>
> Regards
>
> ---
> Sim
>
> 2010/4/18 Christian Gonzalez :
>>> Christian Gonzalez wrote:
Hi
On 19 Apr 2010 at 16:17, Tommaso Basilici wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> I'm probably not fitting in the right place of the thread but I just
> signed in and could not know where to start.
> Our only big problem with this upgrade is that the actual debian stable
> (
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I'm probably not fitting in the right place of the thread but I just
signed in and could not know where to start.
Our only big problem with this upgrade is that the actual debian stable
(lenny) still uses 0.94 as shipping version and one has to get vol
Simon Hobson wrote:
Eric Rostetter wrote:
Signature updates, yes, but not code updates. To make any changes,
you need code updates, not signature updates.
Apart from 0.95.3 released about the same time the kill decision was
made - could have put a code change in there. And 0.96 which was
r
On 19/04/2010, at 10:26 PM, Török Edwin wrote:
> On 2010-04-19 15:09, James Brown wrote:
>>
>> On 19/04/2010, at 9:18 PM, Török Edwin wrote:
>>> Try this:
>>> $ cat >test.c <>> int main()
>>> {
>>> float x = __builtin_huge_valf();
>>> return 0;
>>> }
>>> EOF
>>> $ gcc test.c
>>
>> Yes, no error
Hi!
Solved ... Here the details:
https://wwws.clamav.net/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1950
Thanks to Török Edwin, aCaB and the ClamAV Team!
Upgrading zlib to 1.2.4 I've solved the problem,
Regards
---
Sim
2010/4/18 Christian Gonzalez :
>> Christian Gonzalez wrote:
>>> Hi list,
>>>
>>> As many, I'
Hi!
Solved ... Here the details:
https://wwws.clamav.net/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1950
Thanks to Török Edwin, aCaB and the ClamAV Team!
Upgrading zlib to 1.2.4 I've solved the problem,
Regards
---
Sim
2010/4/15 G.W. Haywood :
> Hi there,
>
> On Wed, 14 Apr 2010 Ben Bauer wrote:
>
>> ClamAV 0.
On 2010-04-19 15:09, James Brown wrote:
>
> On 19/04/2010, at 9:18 PM, Török Edwin wrote:
>> Try this:
>> $ cat >test.c <> int main()
>> {
>> float x = __builtin_huge_valf();
>> return 0;
>> }
>> EOF
>> $ gcc test.c
>
> Yes, no errors there.
Try this:
cd libclamav/c++
make CalcSpillWeights.lo CX
On 19/04/2010, at 9:18 PM, Török Edwin wrote:
> On 2010-04-19 14:17, James Brown wrote:
>>
>> On 19/04/2010, at 9:09 PM, Török Edwin wrote:
>>
>>> Does this compile correctly:
>>> $ cat >test.c <>> int main()
>>> {
>>> float x = __builtin_huge_valf();
>>> return
>>> }
>>> EOF
>>> $ gcc test.c
>
On 2010-04-19 14:17, James Brown wrote:
>
> On 19/04/2010, at 9:09 PM, Török Edwin wrote:
>
>> Does this compile correctly:
>> $ cat >test.c <> int main()
>> {
>> float x = __builtin_huge_valf();
>> return
>> }
>> EOF
>> $ gcc test.c
>
> No.
>
> I get:
>
> test.c: In function 'main':
> test.c:
On 19/04/2010, at 9:09 PM, Török Edwin wrote:
> Does this compile correctly:
> $ cat >test.c < int main()
> {
> float x = __builtin_huge_valf();
> return
> }
> EOF
> $ gcc test.c
No.
I get:
test.c: In function 'main':
test.c:5: error: parse error before '}' token
I don't think I mistyped anyt
On 2010-04-19 14:05, James Brown wrote:
>
> On 19/04/2010, at 7:54 PM, Török Edwin wrote:
>
>> On 2010-04-19 12:35, James Brown wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks Edwin.
>>>
>>> Ok. Was able to apply the patch.
>>>
>>> Typed 'make' but the compile failed with the same error as before.
>>>
>>> Do I need to
On 19/04/2010, at 7:54 PM, Török Edwin wrote:
> On 2010-04-19 12:35, James Brown wrote:
>>
>>
>> Thanks Edwin.
>>
>> Ok. Was able to apply the patch.
>>
>> Typed 'make' but the compile failed with the same error as before.
>>
>> Do I need to run ./configure again? Do I need to start from a f
On 2010-04-19 12:35, James Brown wrote:
>
> On 19/04/2010, at 6:12 PM, Török Edwin wrote:
>
>> On 04/19/2010 11:08 AM, James Brown wrote:
>>>
>>> On 19/04/2010, at 6:01 PM, Török Edwin wrote:
>>>
You don't need to tell 'patch' which file to patch, since it knows
already: it is libclamav
On 19/04/2010, at 6:12 PM, Török Edwin wrote:
> On 04/19/2010 11:08 AM, James Brown wrote:
>>
>> On 19/04/2010, at 6:01 PM, Török Edwin wrote:
>>
>>> You don't need to tell 'patch' which file to patch, since it knows
>>> already: it is libclamav/c++/llvm/include/llvm/System/DataTypes.h.in.
>>>
On Mon, Apr 19, 2010 at 10:49 AM, Jeroen Ticheler
wrote:
> Hi Peter,
> Although I don't agree with aggressive emails, I do myself have serious
> problems that started on exactly the 15th. Since then my mail server has
> become completely unreliable and an upgrade to 0.95.3 has not resolved my
>
Hi Peter,
Although I don't agree with aggressive emails, I do myself have serious
problems that started on exactly the 15th. Since then my mail server has become
completely unreliable and an upgrade to 0.95.3 has not resolved my problems
yet. I notice I am not the only person that has a problem
On Mon, Apr 19, 2010 at 10:13 AM, Giampaolo Tomassoni
wrote:
> Forcefully unsubscribing people is not a fair way to silence them. Not even
> explaining why is even worse.
...on the other hand the description of this mailing list is
"obtaining support for UNIX platforms". In my mind you have no
in
> > Forcefully unsubscribing people is not a fair way to silence them.
> Not
> > even
> > explaining why is even worse.
> >
> > Maybe somebody of you will reply "Welcome to world!", but this
> doesn't
> > make
> > you any better at all.
>
>
> Could it be that there where bouncing emails because o
Hi, after amavis restarted is all ok !
Thanks.
--
Salvatore.
- Original Message -
From: "Török Edwin"
To:
Sent: Friday, April 16, 2010 4:14 PM
Subject: Re: [Clamav-users] File size limit exceeded
On 04/16/2010 05:09 PM, Sasa wrote:
Hi, I have this situation:
[r...@mail ~
> Forcefully unsubscribing people is not a fair way to silence them. Not
> even
> explaining why is even worse.
>
> Maybe somebody of you will reply "Welcome to world!", but this doesn't
> make
> you any better at all.
Could it be that there where bouncing emails because of the downtime you had?
Forcefully unsubscribing people is not a fair way to silence them. Not even
explaining why is even worse.
Maybe somebody of you will reply "Welcome to world!", but this doesn't make
you any better at all.
Giampaolo
___
Help us build a comprehensive Cla
On 04/19/2010 11:08 AM, James Brown wrote:
>
> On 19/04/2010, at 6:01 PM, Török Edwin wrote:
>
>> You don't need to tell 'patch' which file to patch, since it knows
>> already: it is libclamav/c++/llvm/include/llvm/System/DataTypes.h.in.
>>
>> So you do this: you copy+paste my patch to a file (le
On 19/04/2010, at 6:01 PM, Török Edwin wrote:
> You don't need to tell 'patch' which file to patch, since it knows
> already: it is libclamav/c++/llvm/include/llvm/System/DataTypes.h.in.
>
> So you do this: you copy+paste my patch to a file (lets say float.patch).
> Then cd into the clamav sourc
On 04/19/2010 10:55 AM, Jeroen Ticheler wrote:
> freshclam -V says:
> ClamAV 0.95.3/10757/Sun Apr 18 22:29:28 2010
>
> And aptitude doesn't indicate any upgrade is required.
Did you restart freshclam? (if it is running as a daemon).
If yes try to find out which program is causing your /tmp to be
On 04/19/2010 10:50 AM, James Brown wrote:
>>
>> diff --git a/libclamav/c++/llvm/include/llvm/System/DataTypes.h.in
>> b/libclamav/c++/llvm/include/llvm/System/DataTypes.h.in
>> index 1f8ce79..879650b 100644
>> --- a/libclamav/c++/llvm/include/llvm/System/DataTypes.h.in
>> +++ b/libclamav/c++/llvm/
freshclam -V says:
ClamAV 0.95.3/10757/Sun Apr 18 22:29:28 2010
And aptitude doesn't indicate any upgrade is required.
Regards,
Jeroen
On 19 apr 2010, at 09:30, Török Edwin wrote:
> Are you sure you upgraded freshclam too? And not just clamd?
> They are separate packages on Debian.
Thanks Török.
On 19/04/2010, at 5:23 PM, Török Edwin wrote:
> On 04/19/2010 07:04 AM, James Brown wrote:
>> I asked this question last week, but haven't got any replies. I'm re-posting
>> it because a) it will give everyone a break from the 0.94 EOL tweet wars :-)
>> and b) I'll try to provide
On 04/19/2010 10:21 AM, Jeroen Ticheler wrote:
> Hi Edwin,
> Thanks for responding! Here's the output of clamconf -n:
This looks all good.
Are you sure you upgraded freshclam too? And not just clamd?
They are separate packages on Debian.
Best regards,
--Edwin
On 04/19/2010 10:10 AM, a bv wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Something occured as a problem which qmail (and clamav clamd clamdscan
> works on it) which acts as an external mail gateway which
> communicates /works with the internal mail server. Someday we saw
> that the mail traffic start not working, rest
> Quoting Giampaolo Tomassoni :
>
> > In 6 months there were many clamav updates. I would have put the
>
> Signature updates, yes, but not code updates. To make any changes,
> you need code updates, not signature updates.
Of course I meant code updates. How can you change the signature update c
On 04/19/2010 07:04 AM, James Brown wrote:
> I asked this question last week, but haven't got any replies. I'm re-posting
> it because a) it will give everyone a break from the 0.94 EOL tweet wars :-)
> and b) I'll try to provide more info.
>
> Any help would be much appreciated, as obviously I
Hi Edwin,
Thanks for responding! Here's the output of clamconf -n:
Checking configuration files in /etc/clamav
Config file: clamd.conf
---
LogFile = "/var/log/clamav/clamav.log"
LogFileMaxSize = "10485760"
LogTime = "yes"
LogSyslog = "yes"
LogVerbose = "y
Hi all,
Something occured as a problem which qmail (and clamav clamd clamdscan
works on it) which acts as an external mail gateway which
communicates /works with the internal mail server. Someday we saw
that the mail traffic start not working, restarting the both mail
servers didnt worked but di
Eric Rostetter wrote:
Signature updates, yes, but not code updates. To make any changes,
you need code updates, not signature updates.
Apart from 0.95.3 released about the same time the kill decision was
made - could have put a code change in there. And 0.96 which was
released a couple of w
On 04/19/2010 02:03 AM, Jeroen Ticheler wrote:
> Dear people,
> I have seen a couple of threads related to a version upgrade of clamav. I was
> running clamav v0.94 and suddenly experienced a harddisk that started filling
> up with clamav folders with names like /tmp/clamav-63f56fc3114e9716 . Thi
71 matches
Mail list logo
