On 2008/10/07 09:35 PM Tomasz Kojm wrote:
> 1. the requested functionality has been implemented in SVN
> (and will be included in 0.94.1):
Thanks a lot Tom.
___
Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide: visit http://wiki.clamav.net
http://www.clamav.ne
On 2008/10/07 12:05 AM Jerry wrote:
> Just out of morbid curiosity, who is holding a gun to your head forcing
> you to use 'hobby products' anyway? No one is being forced to do
> anything, therefore they have no discernible right to demand that the
> developer of the product they are using change i
On 2008/10/04 06:17 PM Rick Cooper wrote:
> What he actually said was:
>
> "This is further aggravated by the fact that Exim does not know how to
> gracefully handle failures of clamav daemon."
>
> It doesn't stop, it issues a temporary local problem deferral
MUA's do not understand temporary de
On 2008/10/04 10:55 PM Dennis Peterson wrote:
> configuration problems. You need to classify those machines and knock
> off some class-based templates and be done with it. I don't see that as
> a vendor problem.
Of course it's a vendor problem! :) You even just said why. We'd have
to keep conti
On 2008/10/04 10:15 PM Bernd Petrovitsch wrote:
>> users to sit and audit each change. On Ubuntu for example there can be
>> as many as 30 to 50 updates a week.
>
> Using a desktop distribution on a server was *your* decision. And you
> really *must* upgrade that much?
> Probably not really.
It'
On 2008/10/04 12:50 PM Jerry wrote:
> From my experience, if an end user refuses to RTFM, adding additional
> reading material is not going to solve the problem. The needed
> documentation is all ready readily available. The motivation to fetch
> and read it are what is sorely lacking.
You're conf
On 2008/10/04 12:17 AM Jerry wrote:
> On Fri, 03 Oct 2008 21:16:31 +0200
> Colin Alston <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> What seems bogus is why someone would flippantly hand wave a problem
>> with the arbitrary reason that the version number is still <1.
>
>
On 2008/10/03 06:35 PM Eric Rostetter wrote:
> Quoting "David F. Skoll" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>> Where did I insult? (The OP was not me.)
>
> I didn't mean to imply you insulted them. I was pointing out that
> the OP did, and that it is inappropriate to do so. Didn't mean
> to imply anything
On 2008/10/03 05:57 PM James Kosin wrote:
> Colin Alston wrote:
>> I've had enough now, and I want all you ClamAV people to listen up.
>>
>
> Hay, maybe the packagers could write a script or something to indicate a
> problem with the current configuration when it is b
Christopher X. Candreva wrote:
> It IS a 0.x release. Once he hit 1.x I'll be a lot less forgiving, but as
> long as we're at 0.x I expect this sort of thing -- and still think it's
> better than the next best alternative.
Plenty of things have yet to go past 0.x and are many many years old.
Con
GESBBB wrote:
> Is there any reason you cannot read the documentation prior to installing a
> newer version?
Is there any reason Clam are incapable of stabilising on a configuration
format, or doing the many other things I suggested that other things
abide by?
___
all when options are unrecognised!
I think ClamAV should be mature enough now to start respecting the
users it has and try to behave in a somewhat more stable way.
That is all, thank you for your time and the great work.
--
Colin Alston <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
_
12 matches
Mail list logo
