Sorry if I implied otherwise. I meant Fedora and their difficulties with unrar. I am a big supporter of your Scott, this you know.
Sent from my iPad > On Apr 5, 2019, at 20:53, Scott Kitterman via clamav-users > <clamav-users@lists.clamav.net> wrote: > > On a Debian system with non-free enabled, it only takes "apt install > libclamunrar9" to get the full unrar capability. It's still a better > solution for Debian users to use the packaged version. > > There are a few exceptions (for example, getting 0.101 and libclamav9 > transitioned into our stable release is taking some time, due to reverse > depends and patching needed for the changed API, so if one really needs that > now, then by all means build from source), but generally Debian users are > better served by the O/S integration provided through the packaging system. > > We have an exception to the usual rule about no new versions of packages in > stable releases for clamav, so the usual reason, not wanting to be stuck with > an old version of the package doesn't generally apply. > > I don't want to get into an extended argument about which is better, but I > think Debian does a pretty good job as a clamav distributor. > > Scott K > >> On April 6, 2019 12:21:05 AM UTC, "Joel Esler (jesler)" <jes...@cisco.com> >> wrote: >> Correct. Which is why we recommend people compile from source for full >> functionality. >> >> Sent from my iPhone >> >>> On Apr 5, 2019, at 20:12, Scott Kitterman via clamav-users >> <clamav-users@lists.clamav.net> wrote: >>> >>> The unrar stuff is still free to use. >>> >>> Due to modification restrictions Debian splits it off into the >> unofficial non-free repository. >>> >>> Scott K >>> >>>> On April 6, 2019 12:03:03 AM UTC, "J.R. via clamav-users" >> <clamav-users@lists.clamav.net> wrote: >>>> I just doubled checked, but I don't see a LICENSE file in the >>>> clamav-0.101.2.tar.gz archive??? >>>> >>>> EDIT - There is the GPLv2 contained in the COPYING file. I just >>>> realized each of those files gives the licence for each part of >>>> ClamAV. Probably the most notable is the unrar licence, which if I >>>> recall RHEL/CentOS disables due to licence conflicts? >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Fri, Apr 5, 2019 at 4:30 PM Joel Esler (jesler) >> <jes...@cisco.com> >>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> That’s the content on the website. ClamAV, the software, is >> governed >>>> by the GPLv2 and other associates licenses as indicated by the >> LICENSE >>>> file contained therein. > > _______________________________________________ > > clamav-users mailing list > clamav-users@lists.clamav.net > https://lists.clamav.net/mailman/listinfo/clamav-users > > > Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide: > https://github.com/vrtadmin/clamav-faq > > http://www.clamav.net/contact.html#ml
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________ clamav-users mailing list clamav-users@lists.clamav.net https://lists.clamav.net/mailman/listinfo/clamav-users Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide: https://github.com/vrtadmin/clamav-faq http://www.clamav.net/contact.html#ml
