On 04/24/2010 11:08 AM, jef moskot wrote: > On Sat, 24 Apr 2010, Török Edwin wrote: >> Does Mimedefang run clamscan under ulimit? (or is mimedefang itself >> constrained by some ulimits?) > > I doubled the MX_MAX_RSS and MX_MAX_AS arguments in the startup script, > and it seems to have taken care of the problem (which I was able to > recreate, see below).
What are these values btw? > > If 0.96 uses more memory than 0.95.3, then this would explain why the > problem only occurred when upgrading to the new clam version. I have some patches to reduce memory usage of LLVM in clamav, which will probably be in 0.96.1. > >> ...'make test' didn't have much to say... >> It is called 'make check'... > > Oops. Sorry about that. > > Here's the output of the --disable-llvm version: > > make check-TESTS > PASS: check_clamav > PASS: check_freshclam.sh > PASS: check_sigtool.sh > SKIP: check_unit_vg.sh > PASS: check1_clamscan.sh > PASS: check2_clamd.sh > PASS: check3_clamd.sh > PASS: check4_clamd.sh > SKIP: check5_clamd_vg.sh > SKIP: check6_clamd_vg.sh > SKIP: check7_clamd_hg.sh > SKIP: check8_clamd_hg.sh > ====================== > All 7 tests passed > (5 tests were not run) > > So, does this mean I'm missing out on some functionality, or just that > the work will be done less efficiently? Looks good. It is not missing any functionality, it just runs a little slower when executing bytecode. Best regards, --Edwin _______________________________________________ Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide: visit http://wiki.clamav.net http://www.clamav.net/support/ml
