On Fri, 11 Dec 2009 18:43:03 +
Paul Cockings wrote:
> Stevan Bajic' wrote:
> > On Fri, 11 Dec 2009 18:11:31 +
> > Paul Cockings wrote:
> >
> >> Why do we have two options for clamav?
> >>
> >> CLAMAV
> >> CLAMAV_DEVEL
> >>
> >>
> > We don't have that:
> Ok, must be the freebsd por
Original-Nachricht
> Datum: Fri, 11 Dec 2009 18:43:03 +
> Von: Paul Cockings
> An: [email protected]
> Betreff: Re: [Dspam-devel] ClamAV
> Stevan Bajic' wrote:
> > On Fri, 11 Dec 2009 18:11:31 +
> > Paul Cockings wrote
Stevan Bajic' wrote:
> On Fri, 11 Dec 2009 18:11:31 +
> Paul Cockings wrote:
>
>
>> Why do we have two options for clamav?
>>
>> CLAMAV
>> CLAMAV_DEVEL
>>
>>
> We don't have that:
> # grep -r CLAMAV ./dspam
> ./dspam/configure.ac:AC_DEFINE(CLAMAV, 1, [Defined if clamav is enabled]
On Fri, 11 Dec 2009 18:11:31 +
Paul Cockings wrote:
> Why do we have two options for clamav?
>
> CLAMAV
> CLAMAV_DEVEL
>
We don't have that:
# grep -r CLAMAV ./dspam
./dspam/configure.ac:AC_DEFINE(CLAMAV, 1, [Defined if clamav is enabled])
./dspam/src/dspam.c:#ifdef CLAMAV
./dspam/src/
Why do we have two options for clamav?
CLAMAV
CLAMAV_DEVEL
--
Return on Information:
Google Enterprise Search pays you back
Get the facts.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/google-dev2dev
_