On Tue, 2005-05-03 at 08:23 -0400, Mike Lambert wrote: > The responsible admin will evaluate the pros and cons of _any_ software > release and choose what is best for his/her environment. The difficultly > with any project in development, including ClamAV, is that "current" and > "stable" do not always coincide. Clam v0.80 has been the most stable > version to this point, and I, preferring stability over functionality, > am running 0.80. If running a stable clamav means letting a few viruses > through, then so be it.
Which is why I said, in the bit you snipped, new releases should be tested on a test system that reflects your personal environment - and, by extension, any problems reported back to the developers. The problem with running old versions is that they are not supported, so when you do run into a problem like the one that started this thread, you are on your own, and you'll be told to upgrade to the latest version. > > Now that we have reports of spam crashing v0.80, it is time for me to > test v0.84. How can you say 0.80 is the most stable, when you haven't tested 0.84? Did you test anything after 0.80? -trog
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ http://lurker.clamav.net/list/clamav-users.html
