On Apr 16, 2010, at 10:18 AM, Giampaolo Tomassoni wrote:
It is not something to do know, but instead something that could
have
been
done introducing 0.96...
Giampaolo: There are lots of things that COULD be done, but it is
not
the
philosophy of the ClamAV project.
As I said, the devs have made it clear in the past that they feel
clamd
should fail to run on any problem. They also, it seems to me, have
made
it
clear they do not think people should run older versions, ever, for
any
reason.
Therefor, this is my own statement and I don't want to put words in
the
devs
mouth, but the clear message I get from them is if you aren't the
type
of
admin who always installs the latest, then don't run Clamav. Period.
It's
not the right thing for you.
Let me say first that the systems I manage, i.e.: the ones of my
direct
clients, didn't even noticed this problem since they are all running
0.96
from a Gentoo distro.
I'm driven into this thread by a very different reason, which I
believe is a
bit wider in meaning than ranting against imaginary culprits of my own
troubles. It is about open software and respect of the (mis?)use
people do
of it.
The fact that old clamscans stop working because of a remote "kill"
update,
is grave as it would be for Microsoft to stop 2000 from working with
an
update. Yes, 2000 is a dangerous thing nowadays. But nevertheless
who are
you to shut my computer?
I guess you have never had a Microsoft update that broke your Windows
installation.......
Christopher, you may or may not be the ClamAV spokesman.
Nevertheless I
would like to let the team know that the 0.96 case didn't create
trouble to
administrators (whether or not "responsible"), but to open-software
users. I
believe by the way a lot of "irresponsible" administrators are
really happy
with the ClamAV team right now, since they are going to be hired to
fix
troubles around or -even better- to install new stuff.
That said, please note it is not a matter of administration: most
small
systems are basically unmanaged and owners do know they are not up-
to-date
and that occasionally viruses may slip in. Owners simply feel this
is worth
the fact they don't have to pay for any assistance. When too many
viruses
gets to their mailbox, then they call somebody to fix things.
But if you stop their crappy mailing systems, they will switch to
something
else.
Are developers willing this? I hope they're not.
Giampaolo
_______________________________________________
Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide: visit http://wiki.clamav.net
http://www.clamav.net/support/ml
_______________________________________________
Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide: visit http://wiki.clamav.net
http://www.clamav.net/support/ml
