Ralf Quint wrote:
At 02:09 PM 4/17/2010, Dan wrote:
Those two lines look fairly clear to me. Essentially they're telling
you to get moving, get the update onto your to-be-done list. This
is, of course, re-enforced by the repeated EOL announcements on
Clam-announce.
I can think of two other ways this could have been done, with very
little effort, and with little or no inconvenience to what you would
consider superior admins. That's irrelevant now, you've done what
you've done and it's not going to be undone.
Yea, I agree, the Clam team probably could have done things better.
But would more announcements or warnings have really made a
difference? Why would the people, that regularly ignore the
Freshclam warnings, pay attention?
OTOH, I wonder how many of these upset admins have taken even partial
responsibility - by admitting to their bosses that they failed to
apply any updates to a critical piece of software, for over a YEAR?
You too seem to miss one very important point. It is not the ClamAV
project's place to judge and punish any failure by such admins. That
is soley up to the institution they have to report to.
As far as due diligence goes, ClamAV has done their part by announcing
the EOL of updates for ClamAV version before a certain version ahead
of time. They do not have any right to deliberately mess with a
running system...
No, they clearly stated that changes to the update definitions was going
to cause ClamAV to fail. And those that did not heed the warning were
the only ones affected...
Jim
_______________________________________________
Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide: visit http://wiki.clamav.net
http://www.clamav.net/support/ml
