> And you are free to do so, just as the developers are free to release > signatures that do not work with older versions. That is ALL that > happened. In doing so, clamd fails to be able to properly read the > database and fails.
Things are a bit more complex, because I see the problem of long signatures was known to the team well before the 15. There were both time and capacity to avoid any unwanted side effect. But the team choose to disregard them. > >> There have been numerous pieces of software that I have used over > the > >> years that have died on the vine and no longer suitable for new > >> systems. Do I rant at them that they MUST provide me with a new > >> version, no, I deal with it. Either building my own from sources or > >> moving on to a new piece of software..... > > > > This is not a matter of missing upgrades. This is a matter of > > proactively > > breaking running systems. > > They didn't, YOU did. You failed to properly configure your email to > handle a failure in clamd. > Were there many others like you who also failed to configure their > systems to handle a failure in clamd? Yes, but that again was their > decision as it was yours. Jim, you're still trying mudding me to stop what I'm saying. The fact that the team was aware of the implication of long signatures and the fact that they let things happen, doesn't mean anything to you? > > Jim, you keep adding apples and pears together. Aren't you starting > > feeling > > the importance of what the ClamAV team wanted and let happen? > > > > Yes, they were concerned that new signatures coming out are not > compatible with older versions, stated so, and sent one of them out. > You would be in exactly the same situation next month..... No, the problem is that I'm not in this situation now (I would not be debating otherwise), but I don't want to be in troubles like these in the future, just because someone decides I'm not knowledgeable and responsible enough to run a mail server. Do you understand the implications of what you're saying? > The fact that they made a conscious decision to not have separate > signatures was THEIR decision to make and YOURS to ignore. > > > > >>> The way the clamav team managed this case hits the open software > >>> community > >>> as a whole, being the ClamAV project a well-known member of that > >>> community. > >> > >> Yes, but not necessarily in a negative way...... One of the MAJOR > >> problems with Microsoft software is their insane insistence on > >> backwards compatibility. Sometimes it does not make sense to do so > >> and > >> you just have to bite the bullet and let people know it will not > >> work. > >> In Microsoft's case they simply fail to let people know...... in > >> addition to breaking it. > > > > This is a good point of view which I can easily endorse. But we are > > still > > speaking of stopping working systems. We are not speaking about > > introducing > > a backward incompatibility. > > Yes we are, we are speaking of signatures that can not be handled by > versions older than 0.95. They decided to forego compatibility just as > YOU chose to ignore their warnings. They decided to forego empathy by people who like open-source stuff. This is what they did. And keeping saying the error is only by the sysadmins you aren't you to help them. > And before we get back to "I didn't know", as judges are quick to > point out, ignorance of the law (or in this case changes coming down > the pike) is no excuse. Ahahaha! This is the most silly thing I've ever heard from you! Hahahah! > We are not trying to say you shouldn't feel bad about it sneaking up > on you, but that does not change the fact that the ClamAV team put out > notices 6 months ago that this would happen. So what? This proves they were aware of the problem and that they let pass 6 months not moving a finger. According to your rules, if people ignoring door signs are bad admins, what are developers that in 6 months doesn't find a better solution among the many blatant ones? _______________________________________________ Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide: visit http://wiki.clamav.net http://www.clamav.net/support/ml
