Hi all,
I use clamav 0.90rc2 and my friend uses clamav 0.88.5 (the latest
stable). Just now, after I ran freshclam, i run clamdscan for a worm.
His could detect it as worm and mine didn't. Why is that?
___
Greetings to all.
I am currently using clamav together with getmail. The aim is to pop
from a corporate mailbox, check mail for viruses and distribute it to
final adressees.
Clamscan works pretty well, but for the outdated libraries messages.
That's because the warning is always printed on
On Nov 9, 2006, at 2:09 PM, Jim Redman wrote:
Folks,
I have to say, of all the lists I subscribe to, the vocal members
of this list are the most arrogant and insulting. However, I
consider comments such as Luca Gibelli's, bandwidth wasting, We
are happy to suffer this loss. and Dennis
Bart Silverstrim wrote:
On Nov 9, 2006, at 2:09 PM, Jim Redman wrote:
Folks,
I have to say, of all the lists I subscribe to, the vocal members of
this list are the most arrogant and insulting. However, I consider
comments such as Luca Gibelli's, bandwidth wasting, We are happy to
suffer
On Fri, 10 Nov 2006, zamri wrote:
I use clamav 0.90rc2 and my friend uses clamav 0.88.5 (the latest
stable). Just now, after I ran freshclam, i run clamdscan for a worm.
His could detect it as worm and mine didn't. Why is that?
It would be helpful to state what platform and what worm.
IE, I
Jim Maul wrote:
Bart Silverstrim wrote:
On Nov 9, 2006, at 2:09 PM, Jim Redman wrote:
Folks,
I have to say, of all the lists I subscribe to, the vocal members of
this list are the most arrogant and insulting. However, I consider
comments such as Luca Gibelli's, bandwidth wasting, We are
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Jim Maul wrote:
Maybe i missed it, but where in his original email did he ask anyone
to help him by doing something for him? From what i can see, he
didnt even ask for help at all. The way i took it was:
Gee, I downloaded this package for
On Fri, November 10, 2006 08:57, Christopher X. Candreva wrote:
On Fri, 10 Nov 2006, zamri wrote:
I use clamav 0.90rc2 and my friend uses clamav 0.88.5 (the latest
stable). Just now, after I ran freshclam, i run clamdscan for a worm. His
could detect it as worm and mine didn't. Why is that?
On Fri, 10 Nov 2006, Ken Jones wrote:
https://wwws.clamav.net/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89
Access Denied
You are not authorized to access bug #89.
I think the clam Bugzilla require you to have an account and be logged in to
watch bugs.
On Fri, November 10, 2006 09:33, Christopher X. Candreva wrote:
On Fri, 10 Nov 2006, Ken Jones wrote:
https://wwws.clamav.net/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89
Access Denied
You are not authorized to access bug #89.
I think the clam Bugzilla require you to have an account and be logged in to
On Fri, 10 Nov 2006, Ken Jones wrote:
I do have an account I even have open reported bugs that I am working on
with the developers :) (ok, I've reported and they are trying to fix)
Look man, I just use the bugzulla. I don't want to have to understand
how it works.
Ducks for cover . . .
Christopher X. Candreva wrote:
On Fri, 10 Nov 2006, Ken Jones wrote:
I do have an account I even have open reported bugs that I am working on
with the developers :) (ok, I've reported and they are trying to fix)
Look man, I just use the bugzulla. I don't want to have to understand
how
James Kosin wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Jim Maul wrote:
Maybe i missed it, but where in his original email did he ask anyone
to help him by doing something for him? From what i can see, he
didnt even ask for help at all. The way i took it was:
Gee, I downloaded
On Fri, 10 Nov 2006, Dennis Peterson wrote:
He scores!
Thank you, I'll be here all week. Don't forget to tip your waitresses.
I get the same login error, btw, and since I use Solaris exclusively, I'm
interested.
Look like it's been clasified as a security bug, so I'll let the devel
On Nov 9, 2006, at 2:40 PM, Daniel J McDonald wrote:
On Thu, 2006-11-09 at 10:24 -0500, Bart Silverstrim wrote:
On Nov 7, 2006, at 6:48 PM, Jim Redman wrote:
Chris,
Christopher X. Candreva wrote:
On Tue, 7 Nov 2006, Jim Redman wrote:
My observation is that of all the modern packages
Julian Mehnle wrote:
Sunet Sysadmin wrote:
We have a courier mail server. Running with courier:: filter with
modules ClamAV(unix socket), SA and SPF. Every thing works good. But all
of a sudden i get this error.
submit: Transport endpoint is not connected
Nov 5 04:03:55 jupiter
Dennis Peterson wrote:
Jim Maul wrote:
Bart Silverstrim wrote:
On Nov 9, 2006, at 2:09 PM, Jim Redman wrote:
Folks,
I have to say, of all the lists I subscribe to, the vocal members of
this list are the most arrogant and insulting. However, I consider
comments such as Luca Gibelli's,
On Nov 9, 2006, at 7:23 PM, Tom Metro wrote:
Dennis Peterson wrote:
Jim Redman wrote:
Your opinions, seem to be the prevalent attitude of the vocal
members of this list - if you don't suffer, it wasn't worth it.
His specific problem is he lacks the skill to install and manage
the product.
Bart Silverstrim wrote:
On Nov 9, 2006, at 2:40 PM, Daniel J McDonald wrote:
On Thu, 2006-11-09 at 10:24 -0500, Bart Silverstrim wrote:
On Nov 7, 2006, at 6:48 PM, Jim Redman wrote:
Chris,
Christopher X. Candreva wrote:
On Tue, 7 Nov 2006, Jim Redman wrote:
My observation is that of
On Fri, 10 Nov 2006, Bart Silverstrim wrote:
What you're talking about is hassle...if it's too much hassle, you move
on to something else. That's fine and dandy. But there are many many
many people who are using, for example, ClamAV without throwing a fit
because there's too much in the conf
James Kosin wrote:
Like Dennis said Bringing it all together is what the admin is for.
I disagree. There are some things which are the admin's job, but they
are not the catch-all for all unresolved burdens (bringing it all
together).
Pardon my lecture, but lets review the root of our
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Jim Maul wrote:
Are they really no package maintainers on this list? I find that
hard to believe. Is it really necessary to punish someone for
thinking that maybe, just maybe, a message about clamav packages on
the clamav-users list might
Christopher X. Candreva wrote:
Look like it's been clasified as a security bug, so I'll let the devel
people say what if anything they want to on the list.
That was due to the malicious sample attached.
The bug report itself should now be viewable.
-aCaB
Dennis Peterson wrote:
Jim Maul wrote:
somebody else wrote:
Gee, I downloaded this package for clamav and installed it and now
there are all sorts of other things that still need to be done to get
it working correctly. Maybe clamav developers could work with the
package
Dennis Peterson wrote:
Dennis Peterson wrote:
Jim Maul wrote:
somebody else wrote:
Gee, I downloaded this package for clamav and installed it and now
there are all sorts of other things that still need to be done to get
it working correctly. Maybe clamav developers could work with the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Jim Maul wrote:
Thank you for your overly literal take on my post. Is this a question?:
Depends on your definition of this, but this definitely is: isn't it
about time a moderator stepped in and stopped the spamflow?
Once any argument on the
On Fri, 10 Nov 2006, Dennis Peterson wrote:
He scores!
Thank you, I'll be here all week. Don't forget to tip your waitresses.
I get the same login error, btw, and since I use Solaris exclusively, I'm
interested.
Look like it's been clasified as a security bug, so I'll let
I can confirm this virus is not found with either 0.90.0RC1.1 nor with
0.90.rc2
on Sun Solaris 9 Sparc. It works fine with 0.90rc2 on Sol 10 on Intel. A
report looks like this:
$ clamdscan -v strategy1.mbox
/tmp/strategy1.mbox: OK
--- SCAN SUMMARY ---
Infected
On Nov 10, 2006, at 9:45 AM, Jim Maul wrote:
Bart Silverstrim wrote:
On Nov 9, 2006, at 2:09 PM, Jim Redman wrote:
Folks,
I have to say, of all the lists I subscribe to, the vocal members
of this list are the most arrogant and insulting. However, I
consider comments such as Luca
On Fri, 10 Nov 2006, Bart Silverstrim wrote:
On Nov 10, 2006, at 11:07 AM, jef moskot wrote:
If some packages install without difficulty and others do not, then
how about we work together to bring the less efficient packages in line
with the more effective ones?
Now see, that's a
I have CC or cc on my system - does that work
Linda
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Nigel Horne
Sent: Thursday, November 09, 2006 9:04 AM
To: ClamAV users ML
Subject: Re: [Clamav-users] configure error
On Thu, 2006-11-09 at 08:59 -0600,
Hmm, I wonder how many of the people who responded in one way or another
is actually familiar with the package in question. I have been using
Linux for a couple years now and have installed thousands of packages. In
general, I have not had any problems navigating the package after it has
On 11/11/06, Dennis Peterson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I can confirm this virus is not found with either 0.90.0RC1.1 nor with
0.90.rc2
on Sun Solaris 9 Sparc. It works fine with 0.90rc2 on Sol 10 on Intel. A
report looks like this:
$ clamdscan -v strategy1.mbox
/tmp/strategy1.mbox: OK
On Nov 10, 2006, at 4:10 PM, jef moskot wrote:
On Fri, 10 Nov 2006, Bart Silverstrim wrote:
On Nov 10, 2006, at 11:07 AM, jef moskot wrote:
If some packages install without difficulty and others do not, then
how about we work together to bring the less efficient packages
in line
with the
On Nov 10, 2006, at 6:28 PM, Gary V wrote:
Hmm, I wonder how many of the people who responded in one way or
another is actually familiar with the package in question. I
have been using Linux for a couple years now and have installed
thousands of packages. In general, I have not had any
Bart Silverstrim wrote:
On Nov 10, 2006, at 6:28 PM, Gary V wrote:
Hmm, I wonder how many of the people who responded in one way or
another is actually familiar with the package in question. I have
been using Linux for a couple years now and have installed
thousands of packages. In
36 matches
Mail list logo
