That will tell us whether your problem is with clamav, or with
blackhole.
--
Daniel J McDonald, CCIE # 2495, CNX
Austin Energy
Daniel
have just tried as you said
both .82 and .83 detected the test file
so i need to dig a bit deeper
thanks for you help
Tony
_
On Wed, 2005-02-23 at 18:12 +, ahellary wrote:
> >
> > Detect a virus in a mail passed through the MTA, or a virus saved to the
> > filesystem?
> a virus from an email ... the server i question is a mail server it does
> nothing but mail
Have you tested checking a virus in the file system?
Detect a virus in a mail passed through the MTA, or a virus saved to the
filesystem?
Matt
Matt
a virus from an email ... the server i question is a mail server it does
nothing but mail
Tony
___
http://lurker.clamav.net/list/clamav-users.html
its slackware
I've got 0.83 running OK on slackware... but I had to upgrade zlib... do you
get any make errors?
Matthew.van.Eerde (at) hbinc.com 805.964.4554 x902
Mathew
i get no make errors at all
Tony
___
http://lurker.clamav.net/l
ahellary wrote:
> i STILL cannont get either version .81 or .82 to detect any virus i seem
> to be stuck at ver .80i have posed previously with details of my set
> up but here it is again
>
> its slackware with a 2.2.x kernel , qmail , black hole and spamassin
> version .80 works fine b
ahellary wrote:
> i STILL cannont get either version .81 or .82 to detect any virus
Try 0.83?
> its slackware
I've got 0.83 running OK on slackware... but I had to upgrade zlib... do you
get any make errors?
Matthew.van.Eerde (at) hbinc.com 805.964.4554 x902
Hispanic Business I
Tomasz
i STILL cannont get either version .81 or .82 to detect any virus i seem to
be stuck at ver .80i have posed previously with details of my set up
but here it is again
its slackware with a 2.2.x kernel , qmail , black hole and spamassin version
.80 works fine but numerous attempts
On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 00:32:10 -0600 (CST)
Damian Menscher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, 18 Feb 2005, Tomasz Kojm wrote:
>
> > The signature will be updated on Monday (to better meet the official
> > specification). All clamdwatch users should upgrade to the latest
> > version as soon as pos
On Fri, 18 Feb 2005, Tomasz Kojm wrote:
The signature will be updated on Monday (to better meet the official
specification). All clamdwatch users should upgrade to the latest
version as soon as possible to avoid problems similar to those from
2004.
What's the status of this? I wrote a clmilter_wat
On Fri, 18 Feb 2005 15:45:54 -0600 (CST)
Damian Menscher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, 18 Feb 2005, Tomasz Kojm wrote:
>
> > The signature will be updated on Monday (to better meet the official
> > specification). All clamdwatch users should upgrade to the latest
> > version as soon as pos
On Fri, 18 Feb 2005 15:45:54 -0600 (CST), Damian Menscher
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Latest version of clamav, or clamdwatch?
Latest version of clamdwatch (0.7.1, as distributed with clamav 0.83).
> Why is the most recent version required (I'm assuming some new
> functionality is required, but
On Fri, 18 Feb 2005, Tomasz Kojm wrote:
The signature will be updated on Monday (to better meet the official
specification). All clamdwatch users should upgrade to the latest
version as soon as possible to avoid problems similar to those from
2004.
Latest version of clamav, or clamdwatch?
Why is th
12 matches
Mail list logo
