Quoting Tzafrir Cohen, from the post of Mon, 26 Dec: > > http://apt-get.org/ > > Any horror stories to support that :-) ? I thought that volatile was intented > exatly for those situations.
nope. I guess I'll go read if it stabilized and is recommended for production servers. I haven't checked it out since is was announced as an intention. I just don't like to try new things on production servers after a few past burns (Ask Shachar about the Fiasco fiasco) > The only difference I see is that the Volatile source provides a > "clamav-data" package (which seems rather up-to-date). Thogh I figure > that a host with a decent internet connection would rather simply pull > the data directly from clamav's mirrors with freshclams. clamav-data and clamav-freshclam indeed are contradicting packages. > > unless you have a very very good reason why you want it at the delivery > > stage and not at the MTA level (before it even hits the queue) > > But this means scanning every message, ot just shlomi's ones. Which is > more work. But then again, if nobody ojects that... well, why NOT block all virii on entrence? I understand SA is a memory and CPU hog but there's nothing wrong with clamav, it's C, not perl. > > then again, didn't you say you were converting to Exim? > > Exim? Never! Postfix :-) well, if there's one thing in common between DJB and myself, it's the belief that Wietse Venema is the devil incarnate. hell, even his NAME sounds like an evil Harry Potter monster.. -- Where did my fish go today? Ira Abramov http://ira.abramov.org/email/
