On Mon, 2008-10-06 at 11:37 -0400, Charles Gregory wrote:
> On Sat, 4 Oct 2008, Dennis Peterson wrote:
> > Hopefully they're not running mail servers on the Internet elsewise they
> > could easily be considered derelict in their responsibilities.
>
> Ah. Yes, I must be 'derelict' because there is only ONE sysadmin (me) and
> I go home on weekends?
>
> Heck, I'm not even the 'worst case' you should worry about. I check for
> failures over the weekend. But there are many home-grown servers out
> there, particularly in small offices, that are completely unattended over
> weekends. They are run by very good, intelligent, but NON-technical people
> who bring in a tech guy to set it all up for them, and then have that tech
> guy check up on the system "occasionally". If they have an obvious
> problem, they call their tech guy to "come in". But there is never
> anything 'obvious' about ClamAV aborting. That's the argument here.
What could be more obvious than simply stopping to work?
OK, sending emails before "exit()"?
If you are lucky, the MTA stops to deliver mail. So nowadays people will
probably check it after 2 hours.
The root cause of the whole problem is: Don't take it personally but I
won't let such "users" install or upgrade software if they don't even
remotely check afterwards that the upgrade/install worked[0]?
Please remember that the whole thread started with "it breaks after an
upgrade of ClamAV".
> They could go for *weeks* not knowing their ClamAV has failed silently.
BTW if they don't notice for weeks, it probably wasn't not that
important though. Again no point ....
Bernd
[0]: Let alone on a Friday.
--
Firmix Software GmbH http://www.firmix.at/
mobil: +43 664 4416156 fax: +43 1 7890849-55
Embedded Linux Development and Services
_______________________________________________
Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide: visit http://wiki.clamav.net
http://www.clamav.net/support/ml
