On Tuesday 10 June 2003 10:3622pm, Jon Carnes wrote: > I imagine they can't simply GPL the Linux product. That would > jeopardize the Intellectual Property that MS is actually buying. Well > there is always Sophos, and for the gpl inclined: Clam.
> I installed Clam on a clients server and it is running fairly well. > Admittedly the load is low, but still it seems to be working. > Jon Hi Jon, Thanks for the answer. What I'm more concerned with is about the virus definitions. Someone "on the other side" that provides virus definitions updates 24/7. Even if RAV were to be GPLed, looks like nobody would be providing the updated definitions. GPL sounds good, if updates are good. I gotta check Clam and see what is this. Salut, Sinner -- http://www.ibiblio.org/sinner/ Linux User # 89976 Testing Mandrake 9.1 - Linux Machine # 38068 _______________________________________________ TriLUG mailing list http://www.trilug.org/mailman/listinfo/trilug TriLUG Organizational FAQ: http://www.trilug.org/faq/TriLUG-faq.html
