On 05/21/2010 07:10 AM, James Brown wrote:
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
On 05/21/2010 08:27 AM, Dennis Peterson wrote:
While testing my build of 0.96.1 today I was alerted by a screen message
on starting clamd that I had two bytecode files - compressed and
uncompressed. I removed the uncompressed file and restarted clamd. Later
I checked the log to see if there
On 05/21/2010 08:40 AM, Dennis Peterson wrote:
On 5/20/10 10:27 PM, Dennis Peterson wrote:
While testing my build of 0.96.1 today I was alerted by a screen message
on starting clamd that I had two bytecode files - compressed and
uncompressed. I removed the uncompressed file and restarted
On 05/21/2010 10:37 AM, James Brown wrote:
CCLD libclamav.la
ld: Undefined symbols:
__Unwind_Resume
This is bug #1995 (I'll add an entry to the wiki). Try --disable-llvm.
However I did add a configure check to try and link a C++ program, and
that check passed (since it started building
On 21/05/2010, at 5:45 PM, Török Edwin wrote:
On 05/21/2010 10:37 AM, James Brown wrote:
CCLD libclamav.la
ld: Undefined symbols:
__Unwind_Resume
This is bug #1995 (I'll add an entry to the wiki). Try --disable-llvm.
However I did add a configure check to try and link a C++ program,
On Thu, 20 May 2010 22:40:59 -0700 Dennis Peterson denni...@inetnw.com
wrote:
$ freshclam
ClamAV update process started at Thu May 20 22:39:04 2010
main.cld is up to date (version: 52, sigs: 704727, f-level: 44, builder:
sven)
daily.cld is up to date (version: 11061, sigs: 81529, f-level:
Thank you Edwin, much appreciated. My users tell me they are able to send
emails to that domain again
Matt Hamilla
McAdams Wright Ragen
206.664.8850 x1664
mhami...@mwrinc.com
-Original Message-
From: clamav-users-boun...@lists.clamav.net
[mailto:clamav-users-boun...@lists.clamav.net]
On 5/21/10 12:16 AM, Török Edwin wrote:
On 05/21/2010 08:40 AM, Dennis Peterson wrote:
On 5/20/10 10:27 PM, Dennis Peterson wrote:
While testing my build of 0.96.1 today I was alerted by a screen message
on starting clamd that I had two bytecode files - compressed and
uncompressed. I removed
On 05/21/2010 05:15 PM, Dennis Peterson wrote:
On 5/21/10 12:16 AM, Török Edwin wrote:
On 05/21/2010 08:40 AM, Dennis Peterson wrote:
On 5/20/10 10:27 PM, Dennis Peterson wrote:
While testing my build of 0.96.1 today I was alerted by a screen
message
on starting clamd that I had two bytecode
On 05/21/2010 05:17 PM, Török Edwin wrote:
On 05/21/2010 05:15 PM, Dennis Peterson wrote:
On 5/21/10 12:16 AM, Török Edwin wrote:
On 05/21/2010 08:40 AM, Dennis Peterson wrote:
On 5/20/10 10:27 PM, Dennis Peterson wrote:
While testing my build of 0.96.1 today I was alerted by a screen
On 5/21/10 7:17 AM, Török Edwin wrote:
On 05/21/2010 05:15 PM, Dennis Peterson wrote:
This is Solaris 9 on Sparc.
OK, I'll do some tests on Solaris9/Sparc.
Is everything OK on Solaris10/Sparc?
Haven't built that one yet. I'm still trying to understand what happened here.
dp
LOL
You are assuming I use PC on my network.
Sorry I don't mean the LOL in a bad way at all. I guess I just come from a
different world (I started my life on Sun).
I believe each of the points you both made, including OUTBOUND security to
prevent hackers from using a hacked machine on
On 5/21/10 7:17 AM, Török Edwin wrote:
On 05/21/2010 05:15 PM, Dennis Peterson wrote:
I don't get this error, what OS/arch is this?
ERROR: Failed to load new database: Malformed database
This message was in freshclam's log though, right?
This is Solaris 9 on Sparc.
OK, I'll do some
On 05/21/2010 05:49 PM, Dennis Peterson wrote:
I just repeated this test (manually dl bytecode.cvd and test it with
clamscan)
My configuration is probably different than yours, that is why it fails
for you and not for me.
That is why I asked for output of 'clamconf -n'. Can you provide it
If your using wget:
form the man pages under -c option
Note that you don’t need to specify this option if you just want the current
invocation of Wget to retry downloading a file should the connection be lost
midway through. This is the default behavior. -c only affects
On 05/21/2010 06:14 PM, Shawn Bakhtiar wrote:
If your using wget:
form the man pages under -c option
Note that you don’t need to specify this option if you just want the current
invocation of Wget to retry downloading a file should the connection be lost
midway through.
On 05/21/2010 06:14 PM, Török Edwin wrote:
On 05/21/2010 06:12 PM, Dennis Peterson wrote:
On 5/21/10 8:06 AM, Török Edwin wrote:
On 05/21/2010 05:49 PM, Dennis Peterson wrote:
I just repeated this test (manually dl bytecode.cvd and test it with
clamscan)
My configuration is probably
On 5/21/10 8:14 AM, Shawn Bakhtiar wrote:
If your using wget:
form the man pages under -c option
Note that you don’t need to specify this option if you just want the current
invocation of Wget to retry downloading a file should the connection be lost
midway through. This is
On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 7:48 AM, Shawn Bakhtiar shashan...@hotmail.comwrote:
I believe each of the points you both made, including OUTBOUND security to
prevent hackers from using a hacked machine on our network, are very valid
points. But I have yet to see gateway blocks actually reduce the
On 5/21/10 8:33 AM, Freddie Cash wrote:
It may not have happened on your network, but it's (filtering outbound
traffic) saved our bacon several times over the years, especially back in
the Code Red/Nimda days. And, in an educational setting (I work for a
school district now), you definitely do
On 05/21/2010 06:50 PM, Dennis Peterson wrote:
On 5/21/10 8:22 AM, Török Edwin wrote:
-lmalloc? That looks like something related to the memory allocation
failure? Can you try without it?
And I'll try to see if I can reproduce the problem with -lmalloc.
Yep it fails with -lmalloc here.
On 5/21/10 8:22 AM, Török Edwin wrote:
-lmalloc? That looks like something related to the memory allocation
failure? Can you try without it?
And I'll try to see if I can reproduce the problem with -lmalloc.
Yep it fails with -lmalloc here.
Please remove that from LDFLAGS, and it should
Indeed.
I do scan all inbound out outbound email for spam AND viruses.
Our ISP managed the MX records, we have to tell them to setup the correct
reverses.
I am the admin, and users are only allowed to install apps in there own user
space, not OS space.
That is the idea, to have people want
Hi,
I upgraded to 0.96.1. Whenever I restart clamd, it will prompt me the error
below.
Starting Clam AntiVirus Daemon: LibClamAV Warning: Detected duplicate
databases /var/clamav/main.cvd and /var/clamav/main.cld, please manually
remove one of them
Which file should I delete?
Regards
wL
On 5/21/10 9:28 PM, ClamAV List wrote:
Hi,
I upgraded to 0.96.1. Whenever I restart clamd, it will prompt me the error
below.
Starting Clam AntiVirus Daemon: LibClamAV Warning: Detected duplicate
databases /var/clamav/main.cvd and /var/clamav/main.cld, please manually
remove one of them
Has the team explored the notion of checking MD5 hashes of signature files
before deciding to reload them? Is it even possible to reload only those that
have changed since the last reload?
dp
___
Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide: visit
26 matches
Mail list logo
