On 2008-10-06 13:41, giggz wrote:
Hi,
I would like to have the same output as clamscan -i, but with the
clamav daemon. Is it possible ?
If you are scanning a directory, then clamdscan will only show infected
files,
if you're scanning a single file it'll always show whether it is
infected/OK.
On Tue, 2008-10-07 at 05:12 +0200, Colin Alston wrote:
On 2008/10/07 12:05 AM Jerry wrote:
Just out of morbid curiosity, who is holding a gun to your head forcing
you to use 'hobby products' anyway? No one is being forced to do
anything, therefore they have no discernible right to demand
On Tuesday 07 October 2008, Sergey wrote:
Why has check not passed ?
checking for bzlib.h... yes
checking for CVE-2008-1372... bugged
configure: WARNING: ** bzip2 libraries are affected by the CVE-2008-1372
bug
configure: WARNING: ** We strongly suggest you to update to bzip2
Hello.
Why has check not passed ?
checking for bzlib.h... yes
checking for CVE-2008-1372... bugged
configure: WARNING: ** bzip2 libraries are affected by the CVE-2008-1372 bug
configure: WARNING: ** We strongly suggest you to update to bzip2 1.0.5.
configure: WARNING: ** Please do
Török Edwin a écrit :
On 2008-10-06 13:41, giggz wrote:
Hi,
I would like to have the same output as clamscan -i, but with the
clamav daemon. Is it possible ?
If you are scanning a directory, then clamdscan will only show infected
files,
on my computer :
11:17 [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~ %
Tomasz Kojm a écrit :
On Tue, 07 Oct 2008 11:20:45 +0200
giggz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
on my computer :
11:17 [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~ % clamdscan --no-summary folder
/home/giggz/folder: OK
So I always get the line /home/giggz/folder: OK
It's not very important. But I put a line with
Firstly, apologies for failing to remove my spam tags ([0.0]) in some
e-mails. I know it messes up threading. I try to remember. Sorry.
On 2008/10/07 12:05 AM Jerry wrote:
Just out of morbid curiosity, who is holding a gun to your head...
Money. The 'gun' is money. Or, more precisely stated,
Tomasz Kojm a écrit :
On Tue, 07 Oct 2008 11:32:10 +0200
giggz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yes, it's a good solution. But clamscan -ir give to me the perfect
output, so I searched if clamdscan could give me the same.
I think it should be fixed in clamdscan so please open a bug report
at
On Tue, 07 Oct 2008 11:20:45 +0200
giggz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
on my computer :
11:17 [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~ % clamdscan --no-summary folder
/home/giggz/folder: OK
So I always get the line /home/giggz/folder: OK
It's not very important. But I put a line with clamdscan in a cron. So
Hello.
I found in log
Tue Oct 7 16:41:18 2008 - Software version from DNS: 0.94
Tue Oct 7 16:41:18 2008 - WARNING: Your ClamAV installation is OUTDATED!
Tue Oct 7 16:41:18 2008 - WARNING: Local version: 0.94-exp Recommended
version: 0.94
Tue Oct 7 16:41:18 2008 - DON'T PANIC! Read
On 2008/10/7 Charles Gregory wrote:
We only 'demand' the right to have our suggestions heard in their proper
context, and not held up against the idealistic standards of the lucky
few.
I must say that for the disadvantaged, this has been a great debate.
However, it has missed the basic
On 2008-10-07 14:51, Sergey wrote:
Hello.
I found in log
Tue Oct 7 16:41:18 2008 - Software version from DNS: 0.94
Tue Oct 7 16:41:18 2008 - WARNING: Your ClamAV installation is OUTDATED!
Tue Oct 7 16:41:18 2008 - WARNING: Local version: 0.94-exp Recommended
version: 0.94
Tue Oct 7
On Tue, 07 Oct 2008 11:32:10 +0200
giggz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yes, it's a good solution. But clamscan -ir give to me the perfect
output, so I searched if clamdscan could give me the same.
I think it should be fixed in clamdscan so please open a bug report
at http://bugs.clamav.net
Thanks,
On Tue, 07 Oct 2008 05:12:58 +0200
Colin Alston [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 2008/10/07 12:05 AM Jerry wrote:
Just out of morbid curiosity, who is holding a gun to your head
forcing you to use 'hobby products' anyway? No one is being forced
to do anything, therefore they have no discernible
On 2008-10-07 14:04, giggz wrote:
Tomasz Kojm a écrit :
On Tue, 07 Oct 2008 11:32:10 +0200
giggz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yes, it's a good solution. But clamscan -ir give to me the perfect
output, so I searched if clamdscan could give me the same.
I think it should be
I am thankful that the underlying spirit of providing good quality
software to those who can't really afford it is not tainted by people
with attitudes like yours.
- Charles
Respect. I have to agree 100% on your very (too ?) polite expression.
Good software simply tells the user, that
Dear All,
I have the following setup whcih i been using for quite some time n
working fine
Centos 5
squid-2.6.STABLE6-4.el5
the server is used as a proxy server
recently a couple of users have complained that their pcs have been
infected by virus and trojans as they experience one local
Hi!
On Tue, 2008-10-07 at 18:47 +0300, Benedict simon wrote:
[...]
I have the following setup whcih i been using for quite some time n
working fine
Centos 5
squid-2.6.STABLE6-4.el5
the server is used as a proxy server
[...]
so i installed clamav-0.94 and when i ran a clamscan it found n
Jerry wrote:
On Fri, 03 Oct 2008 22:12:49 -0700
John Rudd [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
At the very least, when the config file and options change, the ClamAV
team should post a notice which explicitly lists (and only lists):
1) new config items
2) removed config items
3) config items
On Tue, 2008-10-07 at 15:19 +, reiner otto wrote:
[]
Just out of morbid curiosity, who is holding a gun to your head forcing
you to use 'hobby products' anyway? No one is being forced to do
anything, therefore they have no discernible right to demand that the
developer of the product
On Tue, 7 Oct 2008, John Smith wrote:
I must say that for the disadvantaged, this has been a great debate.
However, it has missed the basic premise. The Question and Issue is that
ClamAV is failing without warning.
To which the 'advantaged' respond that the warnings are in 'documentation'
Bowie Bailey wrote:
Jerry wrote:
From my experience, if an end user refuses to RTFM, adding additional
reading material is not going to solve the problem. The needed
documentation is all ready readily available. The motivation to fetch
and read it are what is sorely lacking.
I disagree.
John Smith wrote:
On 2008/10/7 Charles Gregory wrote:
We only 'demand' the right to have our suggestions heard in their proper
context, and not held up against the idealistic standards of the lucky
few.
I must say that for the disadvantaged, this has been a great debate.
However, it has
Hi,
I have a problem:
When I run
/usr/bin/clamscan -i -r --max-recursion=15 --no-summary $DIRECTORY
I get the following error:
UNRAR: rar_malloc(): Attempt to allocate 4294967294 bytes.
Someone could help me?
Thank you all in advance.
Best Regards
--
[]'s
Thiago Henrique
Network
Dennis Peterson wrote:
So does Oracle, Apache, Python, Perl, MySQL, and a zillion other
products. Dead processes are widely accepted to not be chatty. Pardon my
Dennis Miller moment here, but I'm going to go ahead and blame the admin
if a critical process dies and they don't know about it.
Dennis Peterson wrote:
Bowie Bailey wrote:
Jerry wrote:
From my experience, if an end user refuses to RTFM, adding
additional reading material is not going to solve the problem.
The needed documentation is all ready readily available. The
motivation to fetch and read it are what
On Tue, 7 Oct 2008, Dennis Peterson wrote:
I disagree. I think this would be VERY useful. Not for the people who
don't want to RTFM, but for the people who would rather not have to wade
through the docs and changelog to figure out if there are config changes.
Let me help avoid prevent
On Tue, 7 Oct 2008, Dennis Peterson wrote:
However, it has missed the basic premise. The Question and Issue is that
ClamAV is failing without warning.
So does Oracle, Apache, Python, Perl, MySQL, and a zillion other
products. Dead processes are widely accepted to not be chatty.
You're a
On Tue, 7 Oct 2008, David F. Skoll wrote:
Yet you, as a non-ClamAV-developer, are ranting about sysadmin incompetence
and completely ignoring the real issue. The change DOES NOT AFFECT YOU in
the slightest. So what the HECK is your problem?
Well, now that you make me think about it, there is
David F. Skoll wrote:
Dennis Peterson wrote:
So does Oracle, Apache, Python, Perl, MySQL, and a zillion other
products. Dead processes are widely accepted to not be chatty. Pardon my
Dennis Miller moment here, but I'm going to go ahead and blame the admin
if a critical process dies and
What version are you running? What OS? We need more info...
On Tue, Oct 7, 2008 at 11:18 AM, Thiago Henrique [EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote:
Hi,
I have a problem:
When I run
/usr/bin/clamscan -i -r --max-recursion=15 --no-summary $DIRECTORY
I get the following error:
UNRAR: rar_malloc():
Dennis Peterson Wrote:
And you've missed the point that some people here have claimed that
their clamd process has silently failed and was off line for days, and
other such claims. No amount of hand holding for creating config files
is going to make that problem better. That requires an
Jerry wrote:
It is not the operating systems job to stop the user from shooting
himself in the foot, but rather to deliver the bullet as
efficiently and expeditiously as possible.
If that were true, we wouldn't have things like protected memory, chroot
jails, etc. in our operating systems,
Bowie Bailey wrote:
However, doesn't this already exist with the upgrade notes? Take a look
here:
https://wiki.clamav.net/Main/UpgradeNotes093
I don't know if they are this detailed on all of the releases (the notes
for 0.94 don't say much), but this looks like exactly what John was
John Smith wrote:
Dennis Peterson Wrote:
And you've missed the point that some people here have claimed that
their clamd process has silently failed and was off line for days, and
other such claims. No amount of hand holding for creating config files
is going to make that problem
Dennis Peterson wrote:
With the tools we have available to us today there is no reason a failed
process should remain a secret.
Which does not explain the push-back on having the
applications/services/daemons provide better documentation and triggers
for helping that effort, instead of
John Rudd wrote:
Dennis Peterson wrote:
With the tools we have available to us today there is no reason a failed
process should remain a secret.
Which does not explain the push-back on having the
applications/services/daemons provide better documentation and triggers
for helping that
On Tue, 07 Oct 2008 12:07:09 -0700
John Rudd [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Bowie Bailey wrote:
However, doesn't this already exist with the upgrade notes? Take a look
here:
https://wiki.clamav.net/Main/UpgradeNotes093
I don't know if they are this detailed on all of the releases (the
On 2008/10/07 09:35 PM Tomasz Kojm wrote:
1. the requested functionality has been implemented in SVN
(and will be included in 0.94.1):
Thanks a lot Tom.
___
Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide: visit http://wiki.clamav.net
Hi!
On Tue, 2008-10-07 at 18:47 +0300, Benedict simon wrote:
[...]
I have the following setup whcih i been using for quite some time n
working fine
Centos 5
squid-2.6.STABLE6-4.el5
the server is used as a proxy server
[...]
so i installed clamav-0.94 and when i ran a clamscan it
Benedict simon wrote:
really apprecite if someone cd advise me how i could do the integration of
clamav with squid ..
We have had great success with HAVP. Supports multiple AVs (including
ClamAV of course). However, I don't think it's part of any repo.
http://www.server-side.de/
--
--- Benedict simon [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb am Di, 7.10.2008:
Von: Benedict simon [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Betreff: [Clamav-users] squid integration
An: ClamAV users ML clamav-users@lists.clamav.net
Datum: Dienstag, 7. Oktober 2008, 17:47
Dear All,
I have the following setup whcih i been using for
On Tue, 07 Oct 2008 12:02:59 -0700
John Rudd [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jerry wrote:
It is not the operating systems job to stop the user from shooting
himself in the foot, but rather to deliver the bullet as
efficiently and expeditiously as possible.
If that were true, we wouldn't have things
On Tue, 7 Oct 2008 14:01:53 -0500
John Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Dennis Peterson Wrote:
And you've missed the point that some people here have claimed that
their clamd process has silently failed and was off line for days,
and other such claims. No amount of hand holding for creating
Unfortunately, nothing is
fool proof to the properly motivated fool.
One of my customers, from a big international airline, I developed some SW
for, told me: There is nothing like users fault.
After some thinking, I had to admit, he was right. There is only the fault of
the programmer, not
Jerry Wrote:
Seriously John if you are going to start with a new product, one that
you readily admit you have not got a working knowledge of, you have got
to RTFM. Create a jail and place your new program in it and then fire
it up. Check the logs, see what is happening under the hood. Try
46 matches
Mail list logo
