On Sunday 27 June 2004 10:41 pm, Ace Suares wrote:
> > Try using LogFileUnlock, and checking the permissions on the device.
> Jeremy, how did you get this working !?
uhh... It Just Works.
and it just happens to work on every single system I've ever put it on.
Ranging from redhat to gentoo, to
> Try using LogFileUnlock, and checking the permissions on the device.
I suppose you mean putting
LogFileUnlock
in clamav.conf...
but it didn't help. Same error.
> Those do look like clam error messages. And no need to stick to stdout
> - stderr should work the same.
permissions on
On Sun, Jun 27, 2004 at 11:02:04PM -0400, Ace Suares said:
> On Sunday 27 June 2004 22:24, Jeremy Kitchen wrote:
> > no need to patch.
>
> {snip}
>
> > LogFile /dev/stdout should do the trick. I use it on many many many many
> > systems.
>
>
> Thanks for the suggestion - I was thinking along t
On Sunday 27 June 2004 22:24, Jeremy Kitchen wrote:
> no need to patch.
{snip}
> LogFile /dev/stdout should do the trick. I use it on many many many many
> systems.
Thanks for the suggestion - I was thinking along those lines (honestly ;)
But in trying it out, I get this:
@400040df86982
On Sunday 27 June 2004 09:12 pm, Ace Suares wrote:
> Hi,
>
> qscanq (http://www.qscanq.org, http://www.qscanq.org/clamdscan.html) seems
> to want to log to stderr, and provides a patch for it:
> (http://www.qscanq.org/clamav-0.70-stderr.patch.gz)
no need to patch.
> Did this patch make it in the
Hi,
qscanq (http://www.qscanq.org, http://www.qscanq.org/clamdscan.html) seems to
want to log to stderr, and provides a patch for it:
(http://www.qscanq.org/clamav-0.70-stderr.patch.gz)
Did this patch make it in the current release? Will it? Are there special
reasons not to incorporate that p
