>>My application is called every time, a mail arrives.
>
> ...And every time you load the signature databases, I guess...
What he probably means is that you should use ClamD/ClamDScan instead of
ClamScan.
Best regards
Nico
--
+--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] <> schrieb am :
> On 2006-09-27 14:27, Alexander Hagenah wrote:
>> But they are as different speedy, I never expected.
>
> You're loading and unpacking the virus database each time.
> You see the same difference between "clamscan" and "clamdscan".
I see and found the fault in m
>>>My application is called every time, a mail arrives.
>>
>> ...And every time you load the signature databases, I guess...
> What he probably means is that you should use ClamD/ClamDScan instead of
> ClamScan.
Sorry, I brain-farted. What I probably meant is that you should use
ClamD if possibl
On 2006-09-27 14:27, Alexander Hagenah wrote:
But they are as different speedy, I never expected.
You're loading and unpacking the virus database each time.
You see the same difference between "clamscan" and "clamdscan".
--
Paul Bijnens, xplanation Technology ServicesTel +32 16 397.5
Hi,
Le Mercredi 27 Septembre 2006 14:27, Alexander Hagenah a écrit :
> My application is called every time, a mail arrives.
...And every time you load the signature databases, I guess...
Cordialement,
Arnaud Jacques
Consultant Sécurité
Téléphone / Fax : +33-(0)3.44.39.76.46
Portable : +33-(0)6
Howdy,
I'm using my XMail [1] and have 2 virus-scanner implemented into an own
tool, which is working between MTA and the virus-scanners.
There, I am using BitDefender API and ClamAV [libclamav].
My application is called every time, a mail arrives.
But they are as different speedy, I never expec
