Here is Symantec's reply to the submission of
ooRexx-4.2.0.windows.x86_32.exe, saying yes it was a false positive.
--
Mark Miesfeld
-- Forwarded message --
From: Symantec FP Incident Response
Date: Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 7:01 PM
Subject: [No Reply] False Positive Submission [34155
Have just tried re-download. It worked fine. Semantic must have OK'd the
file name as you suggested.
Many thanks. (Why didn't I try contacting Symantec myself? Doh!)
--
Oliver Sims
_
From: Mark Miesfeld [mailto:miesf...@gmail.com]
Sent: 21 January 2014 17:58
To: ooRexx Dev List
Subje
Here is a link to NSIS's page on false positives.
http://nsis.sourceforge.net/NSIS_False_Positives
There are some links to online virus scanners. You can try scanning the
file with one or more of them.
Here is a link to the report of doing a scan from one of them. If you look
at the report, it
I just submitted the release canidate build to Symantec.
Here is their submission received report.
Usually they reply sooner than 2 days. I'll forward their reply as soon as
I get it.
The process of submitting it is relatively easy and straight forward. I
encourage any one who has qualms about
Here is the submission report for 3393192. I couldn't find it at first or
I would have forwarded if first.
As you can see here, the file I submitted had a different file name. Which
is why I think their "correction" may have been file name based.
--
Mark Miesfeld
-- Forwarded message
This is the reply I got from Norton when I submitted the first beta file to
them. As you can see they affirm it is a false positive and say they
corrected it.
--
Mark Miesfeld
-- Forwarded message --
From: Symantec FP Incident Response
Date: Sun, Dec 15, 2013 at 10:50 PM
Subject
On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 6:49 AM, Oliver Sims <
oliver.s...@simsassociates.co.uk> wrote:
> Just downloaded oorexx-4.2.0.windows.x86_32.exe to my XP machine. At end
> of download, Norton anti-virus popped up and said it was "unsafe" and
> removed the downloaded file!!!
>
This is a false positive
Also, some information about what you suspected was causing the problem might
give a nugget of information that could be useful in tracking down the cause.
I didn't get as far as having a suspicion :-). What I was doing (on the 3
occasions that seemed to be reproducible) was:
In a command
Also, some information about what you suspected was causing the problem
might give a nugget of information that could be useful in tracking down
the cause.
Rick
On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 8:28 AM, Mike Cowlishaw wrote:
> Since I installed 4.2.0 RC this morning I've had a couple of 'rxapi has
> s
No, we've not had any reports of issues like that. rxapi has not even had
much (if any) update activity for this release, so it's hard to even guess
what might be going wrong.
Rick
On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 8:28 AM, Mike Cowlishaw wrote:
> Since I installed 4.2.0 RC this morning I've had a cou
Since I installed 4.2.0 RC this morning I've had a couple of 'rxapi has stopped
working' popups. After the second time I thought I had found a way to reproduce
it (a command that caused 2 more occurrences of the popup) but the third try
worked without error, as did several more tries. So it is go
I know a number of people are using my earlier tutorial on how to do merges
with svn, so I thought I'd highlight something I just learned. More recent
versions of svn have a number of enhancements that make doing merges a lot
easier. In particular, it gets rid of the need to do the r(m-1) r(m)
sp
Hi Mark,
That looks good - thank you for creating the bug report.
As you will no doubt have seen, I have created a small folder in the
incubator.
I think that there are many rexx-ers who use Kedit, it is operationally
close enough to Xedit to feel familiar to them and allows them to work the
way
13 matches
Mail list logo
