On Apr 16, 2010, at 4:08 PM, Giampaolo Tomassoni wrote:
This is not a matter of missing upgrades. This is a matter of
proactively
breaking running systems.
Exactly. They proactively broke the scanner so people would know why
it
broke, rather than letting it die with nothing more than an obscure
malformatted hexstring error.
Wasn't it better to simply let these system go the way they were
used to?
What's the difference from the clamav standpoint?
None, and what you be doing next month when the new signatures came
out and those same unpatched systems 'failed'?
Jim
_______________________________________________
Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide: visit http://wiki.clamav.net
http://www.clamav.net/support/ml
