[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > On Wed, 27 Oct 2004, Joe Maimon wrote: > > > The ClamAV authors could put a stop to this by making clamdscan and > > > clamscan the same program and then acting differently depending on > > > which name is run. This is similiar to how gzip and gunzip are > > This has been brought up before and I am surfacing it again because > there was some interest and it would add to the stability of ClamAV. > Very simply, clamdscan needs to timeout the connection to clamd after > some(sane) amount of time and run clamscan. An action could then be > taken to alert someone if clamd died (|sendmail [EMAIL PROTECTED]). > When clamd hangs on our system, mail is deferred until I realize mail > has stopped and as you can imagine, that is a bad thing. Someday I'll > write a mail-server watchdog w/ procmail and cron but I've not had time. > > Any thoughts on how this should be accomplished? >
There are ways to monitor clamd, and run clamscan if clamd is unavailable, without expecting the software itself to do it. Clam is fine as it is. The fault tolerance should be built around the software, not into it. Not meaning to be too blunt about this, but if you have not had time to create a watchdog for yourself, why should you expect someone else to do the job for you? Matt _______________________________________________ http://lists.clamav.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/clamav-users
