Eric Rostetter wrote:
> Quoting "Aecio F. Neto" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> 
>> I don't agree with that, but let me put another option:
>> 1) Break on unknown options
>> 2) Ignore obsolete options and warn OP
> 
> Valid in many cases...
> 
>> If any Op (or poor user) adds an option like
>> PleaseClamAVCleanInfectedFilesForMe yes
>> and expects it to work, are you really sure that the software should not
>> ignore this?
> 
> Yes.  What happens if he means to type "ScanRAR" but makes a typo and
> enters "ScnaRAR".  If it ignores the entry, then the RAR isn't scanned
> according to their wishes/desires.  That is, the software acts in a
> way that isn't expected.
> 
>> I see no difference from mine example to yours, because one should
>> understand at minimum which options are availble before adding one he
>> *thinks* exists.
> 
> What about a simple typo?
> 


Jose-Marcio's elegant J-Chkmail milter has a beautiful option. It will 
create a new config file using to the extent possible all your existing 
options. (That same tool can generate a clean config file that has all 
defaults filled in, too.) If earlier options have changed or have been 
disabled the tool will flag them with comments and place them at the top 
of the config file where they are clear and obvious.

It is still very important to pause in the installation to read and 
understand new options and to determine if the defaults are appropriate 
for your environment. It is the responsibility of each installer to 
fulfill a few simple tasks that are required for an implementation to 
work correctly. People who claim to not have time really need to defer 
to others that do.

dp
_______________________________________________
Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide: visit http://wiki.clamav.net
http://www.clamav.net/support/ml

Reply via email to