At 11:09 AM 1/9/2004, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:thanks. i suspect my invocation needs to be different - when i switch from clamscan to clamdscan, messages are processed - for example - rather than taking 10 seconds, 20 seconds, etc with clamscan, they claim 'ok' in .1 seconds, .7 seconds, etc - which doesn't seem possible.
following up on my own message here - the name clamdscan implies a daemon unto itself, that's why it seems - odd - if clamdscan is to be invoked the same as clamscan. If clamdscan is to run persistently, i'd expect it to be started up once, a la clamd. but perhaps i'm misinterpreting the name - perhaps it doesn't mean 'clam scanning daemon' but rather 'clamd-associated scanning process'...
rather clamdscan = 'scan using the clamd daemon' or maybe better 'direct the clamd daemon to scan the following'
To test your setup, send yourself the eicar test virus and see if it's detected.
You can easily do this from www.testvirus.org If you run all the tests, don't be too alarmed if some of them are not caught - see yesterday's discussion on this.
Very generally expect 10x or so speed improvement using clamdscan rather than clamscan with an MTA, but results will vary widely. Your reported scan time improvement seems quite possible.
--
Noel Jones
------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Perforce Software. Perforce is the Fast Software Configuration Management System offering advanced branching capabilities and atomic changes on 50+ platforms. Free Eval! http://www.perforce.com/perforce/loadprog.html _______________________________________________ Clamav-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/clamav-users
