I am using EPEL version and I dont think I have a choice. But it _might_
be worth looking at difference.
Thanks in advance,
-Neel.
From: Andrew C Aitchison and...@aitchison.me.uk
Sent: Mon, 10 Jun 2024 16:42:49
To: neel roy via clamav-users clamav-users@lists.clamav.net
Cc: neel roy
Thanks. There is one difference I managed to find which is related to services
in general not just clamav - clamd will be restarted on failure if
its running as service. This can be an advantage, and pretty big one,
because otherwise we end up creating watchdog framework which
itself ends up
On Mon, 10 Jun 2024, neel roy via clamav-users wrote:
Thanks.
On selinux, which is the case with me, running clamd as *standalone
process* is more advantageous than running as systemd service. The
reason is mentioned in the post by someone else couple of years
back. I am facing similar
On 10.06.24 10:29, neel roy via clamav-users wrote:
On selinux, which is the case with me, running clamd as *standalone
process* is more advantageous than running as systemd service. The reason
is mentioned in the post by someone else couple of years back. I am
facing similar
Thanks.
On selinux, which is the case with me, running clamd as *standalone process* is
more advantageous than running as systemd service. The reason is mentioned in
the post by someone else couple of years back. I am facing similar
issue:https://github.com/Cisco-Talos/clamav/issues/582
In
On 10.06.24 05:57, neel roy via clamav-users wrote:
There might be possibility that we will use more services from clamd in the
future. So we want to use clamd + clamdscan instead of clamscan.
In which case I wanted to know the difference between running clamd@scan service vs
running clamd.
