Hello all.
After FreshClam execution, I send an email if output code is not 0.
Output code 2, means that Clamav engine is outdated.
Since Yesterday night, FreshClam returns code 2.
Early morning, I did an update. FresClam still cleaming that
installation is OUTDATED...
I googled, search in
If someone can point me to the solution ?!
WARNING: Your ClamAV installation is OUTDATED!
WARNING: Local version: 0.96 Recommended version: 0.96.1
# clamd -V
ClamAV 0.96/11056/Thu May 20 08:33:06 2010
You are using 0.96.. the latest being 0.96.1, released yesterday:
Olivier Fauveaux wrote:
Hello all.
After FreshClam execution, I send an email if output code is not 0.
Output code 2, means that Clamav engine is outdated.
Since Yesterday night, FreshClam returns code 2.
Early morning, I did an update. FresClam still cleaming that
installation is
Hello Olivier,
I googled, search in clamav mailing list archive, but didn't find any answer.
The answer is here :
WARNING: Local version: 0.96 Recommended version: 0.96.1
# rpm -qa | grep clam
clamav-db-0.96-3.el5.rf
clamav-0.96-3.el5.rf
clamd-0.96-3.el5.rf
The solution : upgrade your
Le 20/05/2010 10:51, Steve Basford a écrit :
If someone can point me to the solution ?!
WARNING: Your ClamAV installation is OUTDATED!
WARNING: Local version: 0.96 Recommended version: 0.96.1
# clamd -V
ClamAV 0.96/11056/Thu May 20 08:33:06 2010
You are using 0.96.. the latest being
Just a suggestion:
Can we also have a tarball that does not include a database?
For those of us who upgrade, downloading the database in the tarball is a
waste of time, since we already have (presumably) freshclam updating the
database on a regular basis. Also, this would lighten the load on
Jorge Valdes wrote:
Just a suggestion:
Can we also have a tarball that does not include a database?
Hi Jorge,
This has been discussed several times.
The tarball includes the db in order to save some bandwidth on our mirrors.
If you don't want to download the whole tarball, just pull the code
On Thu, 20 May 2010 09:37:40 -0700
Matt Hamilla mhami...@mwrinc.com wrote:
It is clamav causing the problem unless the other mail admin is lying
to me.
I think we need some more details of the exact message that your
client's ISP is seeing. ClamAV does not block domains, it lists certain
On 05/20/2010 07:37 PM, Matt Hamilla wrote:
Im not using clamav, an isp of some of our clients does, and our domain is
blocked. I talked to their mail admin, he says his db is updating twice a
day. Google does not have our site listed as suspicious. Your program
shouldn't be blocking our
Back to the original issue.
I still say having firewalls from higher security zones to lower ones, does not
make sense. Security is only valid when it is INBOUND. Outbound security is no
security at all, just a pain for your users.
Any sysadmin who thinks they are able to fathom all the user
Shawn Bakhtiar wrote:
I still say having firewalls from higher security zones to lower
ones, does not make sense. Security is only valid when it is
INBOUND. Outbound security is no security at all, just a pain for
your users.
I used to think like that, but now I'd respectfully disagree.
On Thu, 2010-05-20 at 16:09 -0400, Shawn Bakhtiar wrote:
Back to the original issue.
I still say having firewalls from higher security zones to lower ones, does
not make sense. Security is only valid when it is INBOUND. Outbound security
is no security at all, just a pain for your users.
On Thu, 20 May 2010, Simon Hobson wrote:
Shawn Bakhtiar wrote:
I still say having firewalls from higher security zones to lower
ones, does not make sense. Security is only valid when it is
INBOUND. Outbound security is no security at all, just a pain for
your users.
I used to think
I had issues upgrading to 0.96 on my Intel OS X 10.4.11 (Tiger) machine, and
now I'm having problems upgrading to 0.96.1.
If I run:
./configure CFLAGS=-O0
it configures OK but 'make' ends in:
CC libclamav_internal_utils_la-regfree.lo
CCLD libclamav_internal_utils.la
CCLD
On Fri, 2010-05-21 at 14:10 +1000, James Brown wrote:
checking for gcc bug PR28045... configure: error: your compiler has gcc
PR28045 bug, use a different compiler, see
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28045
gcc 4.0.1 is a very old compiler ( 4+ years? ). I'd follow their
15 matches
Mail list logo
