On Wednesday, April 29, 2015 07:57:28 PM Kees Theunissen wrote: > On Wed, 29 Apr 2015, jose-marcio martins da cruz wrote: > > On 04/29/2015 06:20 PM, René Bellora wrote: > >> El 29/04/15 a las 13:04, jose-marcio martins da cruz escibió: > >>> Hello, > >>> > >>> I'm getting different results when scanning a infected email message. > >>> > >>> On a Sparc Solaris 10 (32 bits compiled), clamdscan tels me that the > >>> message is infected : "Heuristics.Encrypted.RAR FOUND" > >>> > >>> Testing it on two 64 bits linux boxes (fedora and ubuntu), both tels > >>> me that the message is clean. > >> > >> linux 32bits also report the message clean (with "ArchiveBlockEncrypted > >> yes" in clamd.conf) > > > > Hmmm... > > > > On the Solaris boxes, there are libclamunrar* libraries, while there > > aren't at Linux boxes... > > > > Clamav on Solaris boxes were compiled and installed from sources, while at > > Linux boxes they come from distros... > > > > If I remember, there is a kind of licence problem with rar libraries... > > Debian has put the rar support in the "libclamunrar6" package in the > "non-free" section of the repository. The clamav package doesn't even > mention libclamunrar6 as a dependency or a recommended package. > I guess that a formal dependancy on the non-free "libclamunrar6" > package would have made clamav "non-free" too. > > I didn't check ubuntu but most likely ubuntu has a "libclamunrar6" > package too as ubuntu is derived from debian. > And I don't know anything about clamav in fedora.
Yes. Ubuntu is the same as Debian in this regard. No need to build from source. Scott K _______________________________________________ Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide: https://github.com/vrtadmin/clamav-faq http://www.clamav.net/contact.html#ml
