Re: [Clamav-users] Re: clamd network commands

2004-01-20 Thread Tomasz Kojm
On Tue, 20 Jan 2004 12:52:25 +0100 Laurent Wacrenier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Without saying 'stream: VIRUSNAME FOUND'? That's bad. > > > > No, it won't do that ! > > As far I guess "stream:" is the "file name". What if the file name > containts ": " or if the virus string contraints "F

Re: [Clamav-users] Re: clamd network commands

2004-01-20 Thread Laurent Wacrenier
Le Mar 20 jan 09:01:29 2004, Jim Ramsay écrit: > >I like that, it's probably less ambiguous than SHUTDOWN. > > Um... I think I meant that SHUTDOWN is less ambiguous than QUIT. Probably true if you don't know the shutdown(2) system call who half-close a socket :-) > "What, me fail English? That

Re: [Clamav-users] Re: clamd network commands

2004-01-20 Thread Laurent Wacrenier
Le Mar 20 jan 11:27:27 2004, Tomasz Kojm écrit: > > > PING/PONG is useless. It could have been better if the server had > > > send a banner at connection startup. > > > > Good point - that's much better for determining server state upon > > connection. This banner should also include the clamd v

Re: [Clamav-users] Re: clamd network commands

2004-01-20 Thread Tomasz Kojm
On Mon, 19 Jan 2004 10:56:48 -0600 Jim Ramsay <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > PING/PONG is useless. It could have been better if the server had > > send a banner at connection startup. > > Good point - that's much better for determining server state upon > connection. This banner should also inc