On Apr 16, 2010, at 4:06 PM, Giampaolo Tomassoni wrote:
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.
Which was their decision to make as was yours or your friends to not
be bothered to keep their critical systems up to date.
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?
Yes, it means that they were not going go on supporting the pre 0.95
software and made this fact known to the best of their ability.
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?
Yes, I do, that if I choose not to pay attention to what the software
development happen to software I CHOSE to install, then my systems may
fail. Am I willing to stand by this yes and not whine just because I
waited until too late to do anything about the situation.
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.
Again, this is a place we disagree, I do not think it was an error on
their part.
And I am helping them by allowing them to move forward and concentrate
on new offerings.
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!
Thank you, it was meant to throw some levity into the fray!
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.
Incorrect, they were aware of the problem and STATED they were not
going to do anything about it.
I think it has taken courage on their part to stick to beliefs.
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?
I believe they felt this was the right decision. The only argument
here is that you think they made the wrong choice but you are not
convincing anyone of that......
_______________________________________________
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
