On Mon, 31 Dec 2007 11:30:37 -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > On Sat, 29 Dec 2007 22:40:22 +0100 > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Michael Schwendt) wrote: > > > On Sat, 29 Dec 2007 14:06:13 -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > > > > > - freshclam should work when the package is installed. Currently it > > > requires you to comment a line in a script for no reason I can > > > tell. > > > > Cannot find this in bugzilla. The /etc/sysconfig script disables the > > automatic update on purpose (to prevent unauthorized network access) > > and warns the user about that default. What is wrong with that? > > Where is there a requirement that network access should require > configuration changes?
It's not mandatory, but it's nice to the user. > Should we modify any other network accessing > services to require a config change before using the network? Installation of a package should not enable a network-using service automatically. Accessing the network to download data may be seen as a lesser problem than binding a service to a public port. But both are issues where the user/admin ought to opt-in rather than opt-out. > What good would clamav be on a machine thats not on a network and what > good is it with no up 2 date virus definitions? This question is biased. The update feature is not missing, it can be enabled for automated downloads if the software is told to do that. > > > - The package could not remove the clamav user on removal. > > This I guess is part of the fedora-usermanagement setup. uid/gid removal IMO is a "must not" unless all files with that uid/gid are removed as well. > > > I'm sure I could look around for more issues. > > > > > > > Why can't a volunteer create and maintain a clamav configuration > > > > add-on package, which offers a single system-wide clamav daemon if > > > > that is requested by the clamav user base in Fedora/EPEL? > > > > > > I suppose someone could... thats not my issue however. My issues > > > are in the clamav package itself, not just not having a system wide > > > clamd. > > > > The list is interesting, but it adds more than what I thought has > > been the primary (only?) issue with the Fedora clamav packages. > > Really? So the only real issue you see is that there is no system wide > clamd setup? Yes, based on older [similar threads] that was my impression. The typical clamav-in-fedora critic complains that starting clamd takes more than installing the package and running a service script. It is certainly not the first time somebody tried to run the wrapper-script without even skimming over the readme file. _______________________________________________ epel-devel-list mailing list [email protected] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/epel-devel-list
