Steve,
Steve Holdoway wrote:
On Tue, 07 Nov 2006 11:12:03 -0700
Jim Redman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[snip]
My take on your post is that installing software blindly on a multi-user system
is at best irresponsible. On a workstation on your desk, the effects of your
actions are limited to you alone. This is not the case on a server. It supports
your business model, which is unique to you, so the products you use to perform
this function need to be well understood and uniquely configured to support
your model.
I've just had a rant^H^H^H^H email from someone who wants to deploy our product
on 45 remote sites but wants us to confirm that it'll work, as he can't find
the time to test ( or even install ) it first! Of course we think it'll work,
but I ask myself at that point whether he's in the right job!
I treat all third party products with the same respect, no matter their
complexity. The nike approach cannot be taken in this environment.
You could say the same thing about Spamassassin, SendMail, or nearly ANY
of the packages that are part of a Linux installation. Misinstallation
of any of these could cause havoc (eg bouncing spam - which would be
something over 50,000 e-mails per day for me).
So, in fact, I would make the reverse observation, not providing a
painless installation means that sysadmins are going to mis-install with
the possibility of errors that cause problems for other (net) users.
The thing about, say, Sendmail is that it probably WILL work if you
install it at 45 remote sites, without any testing or configuration.
ClamAV, won't. Sendmail you can update with YUM and it will continue to
work. OK so once in a while the addition to sendmail.cf will break, but
the basic install is safe and secure, even if not "optimal" for any
given site. ClamAV I'm not even going to risk automating a YUM update,
because it's such a pain.
While your point about someone administering 45 systems is valid, I
don't think it's particularly relevant.
Given that software that is much more dangerous and complex CAN
successfully and safely be installed without any user knowledge there is
no reason why ClamAV should need special user attention. Indeed, I
would say that requiring this is, at best, irresponsible because it runs
the risk of others on the net being impacted by dumb installation.
Jim
--
Jim Redman
(505) 662 5156 x85
http://www.ergotech.com
_______________________________________________
http://lurker.clamav.net/list/clamav-users.html
