-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 09/21/2013 07:36 AM, Scott Kitterman wrote: > On Saturday, September 21, 2013 03:34:57 David Benfell wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> As near as I can tell debian's clamav is just broken. It keeps >> whining about clamd.ctl and nothing I can find on the web fixes >> it. > > You didn't post your original configuration, so I don't know what > your original problem was. If you're using a Unix socket and > having a Debian specific problem, it's probably a matter of the > socket not being available in the chroot that postfix, on Debian, > uses by default. Assuming this was your original problem, there > are three ways to solve it: > > 1. Make the socket available in the chroot (/var/spool/postfix/). > 2. Take postfix out of the chroot. 3. Using TCP sockets instead.
The lines I had taken out in main.cf, based on something I found on
the web, are:
#content_filter = scan:127.0.0.1:10026
#receive_override_options = no_address_mappings
And out of master.cf are:
#127.0.0.1:10025 inet n - n - 16 smtpd
#-o content_filter=
#-o
receive_override_options=no_unknown_recipient_checks,no_header_body_checks
#-o smtpd_helo_restrictions=
#-o smtpd_client_restrictions=
#-o smtpd_sender_restrictions=
#-o smtpd_recipient_restrictions=permit_mynetworks,reject
#-o mynetworks_style=host
#-o smtpd_authorized_xforward_hosts=127.0.0.0/8
I think of the three choices you offer, I would prefer to take postfix
out of the chroot. Postfix's configuration is already far more
complicated than I can even begin to make any sense of, the
configuration, copied over from a hosed Arch installation (thanks
systemd upgrade), was not written for it (looking at
https://we.riseup.net/debian/authenticated-smtp it appears the
question becomes what else do I need to do to kill the chroot), and I
would prefer to move in the direction of simplicity.
>
> I use the Debian clamav packages every day. I also maintain them
> for the distro. If you are having problems, I encourage you to
> file bugs in the Debian BTS. I do look at them and try to solve
> them.
If this were back in the 1970s or early 1980s, when I was a
programmer, I might be able to discern what is and is not a bug. The
world has moved quite a ways since then, often leaving me in a state
of fury, because what everybody else thinks is correct behavior I see
as absolutely broken. (And systemd on Arch is not the example I would
choose here: it may be a good idea but it's just not stable yet, it
obscures far too much, and it's a mistake for me to rely on it.)
There's no reconciling those worldviews. I can't tell a bug from
design behavior these days. I just want it to work so I can go back to
focusing on my Ph.D. program which is *not* technology related.
Thanks!
- --
David Benfell
see https://parts-unknown.org/node/2 if you don't understand the
attachment
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.21 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/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=mry2
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
<<attachment: dbenfell.vcf>>
