On Thu, Apr 28, 2005 at 06:15:17PM -0300, Ren� Bellora said: > clamdscan is way faster
Not necessarily. Single file: [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ clamscan F5D5010.exe F5D5010.exe: OK ----------- SCAN SUMMARY ----------- Known viruses: 33876 Engine version: 0.84rc2 Scanned directories: 0 Scanned files: 1 Infected files: 0 Data scanned: 0.18 MB Time: 0.817 sec (0 m 0 s) [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ clamdscan F5D5010.exe /home/steve/F5D5010.exe: OK ----------- SCAN SUMMARY ----------- Infected files: 0 Time: 0.060 sec (0 m 0 s) Large directory tree (20 G or so): [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ clamscan /home/music/ [...] ----------- SCAN SUMMARY ----------- [...] Time: 2059.851 sec (34 m 19 s) [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ clamdscan /home/music/ [...] ----------- SCAN SUMMARY ----------- [...] Time: 2055.595 sec (34 m 15 s) Do you see a significant difference? -- -------------------------------------------------------------------------- | Stephen Gran | La-dee-dee, la-dee-dah. | | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | | | http://www.lobefin.net/~steve | | --------------------------------------------------------------------------
pgpEYtb9mFNOv.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ http://lurker.clamav.net/list/clamav-users.html
