On Tue, 2009-05-26 at 01:33 -0700, martinnitram wrote:
[...]
>   Just wonder, if use EPEL repository src rpm, why don't use the binary rpm
> from repo directly?

Never tried that recently.
If I have to guess: missing dependencies, need for newer packages, some
packages may have been renamed and proper "obsoletes" are missing, ...
Yes, all that is a packaging/distribution issue (and not an
application/ClamAV issue).

BTW I tried to rebuild
http://download.fedora.redhat.com/pub/epel/5/SRPMS/clamav-0.95.1-1.el5.src.rpm 
on FC4 and it wants a "fedora-usermgmt-devel" package (which doesn't exists 
there).
Commenting out the 2 lines in the .spec file makes the package build.
No, I didn't try to run it. Waiting for 0.95.2 to have a reason for an
update.

>   BTW, some of servers of our clients also running FC3, which using the
> source tar from clamav.net, seem work so far so good.

We run it (also) on RHEL3 (and didn't notice any problems). No, I don't
remember on which RedHat/Fedora that was based.

RHEL/CentOS3 needs a few more simple tweaks - bintulis are far older
there.

[ Fullquote deleted ]

        Bernd
-- 
Firmix Software GmbH                   http://www.firmix.at/
mobil: +43 664 4416156                 fax: +43 1 7890849-55
          Embedded Linux Development and Services


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

Reply via email to