On 06/15/2012 07:39 AM, Matt Olney wrote:
On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 9:46 AM, Brian Morrison<[email protected]> wrote:
On Fri, 15 Jun 2012 09:13:30 -0400
Matt Olney<[email protected]> wrote:
We're having some trouble with our freshmeat account. You can
download the latest here, until we get it fixed up:
https://sourceforge.net/projects/clamav/files/
The download is 14MB odd, previous version have been 48MB and when I
run my rpm build script it tells me that the main and daily cvd files
are missing.
--
Brian Morrison
_______________________________________________
Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide: visit http://wiki.clamav.net
http://www.clamav.net/support/ml
Brian,
It looks like our new build system doesn't bundle the .cvds. More
accurately it ships 0-length main and daily cvds. For now you can, of
course, run freshclam to pickup the signature files. We'll revisit the
desired behavior (with or without cvds) and adjust our build process
accordingly. Since you brought it up, do you have a preference or use-case
that supports one behavior or the other?
Matt
_______________________________________________
I too am not the OP, but would like to chime in. I maintain the
qmail-toaster family of packages, of which clamav-toaster is one.
I think Brian hit the nail on the head, that it's "only a problem from a
packaging point of view". I also like that he splits the database out
into a separate package. This makes a lot of sense, and I'm going to
look into changing the way that the clamav-toaster package (rpm) handles
this. Thanks for the idea, Brian.
Redistributing the database (2/3 of the size of the download) makes no
sense when doing an upgrade, which is by far the majority of the cases.
Doing so is a total waste of bandwidth. At the same time, new installs
need to have these files one way or another, and can be obtained
efficiently either as a separate clamav-db package as Brian does, or
perhaps by running freshclam as a post-install process. In any case, I
think this is a decision best left to the packager.
The crux of the matter in my mind is that when the upstream packaging
changes, it tends to break things downstream. I honestly don't care if
the database comes in a separate tarball or not, as I'll write a spec
file accordingly. The bottom line to me is that things such as this
shouldn't change w/out letting people downstream know about it. Of
course accidents do happen, but the size of the file alone would seem to
be an indicator that something's not quite right. I also understand that
when build processes change, things like this may happen. I just hope
0.97.5 wasn't released with someone knowing that the database files were
empty. That to me is negligent.
I agree with Jim as well that I don't see a reason to change. If there's
a reason to change that we're not aware of, simply let us know *ahead of
time* so that we can make changes accordingly.
Thanks for your consideration, and your work on clamav.
--
-Eric 'shubes'
_______________________________________________
Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide: visit http://wiki.clamav.net
http://www.clamav.net/support/ml
