On Sunday 28 March 2004 3:32 am, Fred Flintstone wrote:
> > > I'm having some trouble compiling clamav on an old Linux 2.0 box
> >
> > what is the purpose in running such an old
> > system (updated last month, for the first time in three years)?
>
> The problem is mainly a lack of time. Over the y
Fred Flintstone wrote:
I'm having some trouble compiling clamav on an old Linux 2.0 box (complete with gcc 2.95.3 and libc5).
[snip]
The machine can build and install clamav-0.24 cleanly. But it always fails on later versions such as 0.54, 0.68 and 0.70-rc. The output for an 0.68 attempt follows
Hi,
I have a strong suspicion, that none of incoming .zip attachments is scanned; how do I
verify that? and how do I enable scanning attachments at all?
Thanks!
---
This SF.Net email is sponsored by: IBM Linux Tutorials
Free Linux tutorial p
On Sunday 28 March 2004 2:48 pm, Michael Shekman wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have a strong suspicion, that none of incoming .zip attachments is
> scanned; how do I verify that?
Send yourself an Eicar test string inside a zip file.
http://www.eicar.org/anti_virus_test_file.htm
> and how do I enable scann
> GMX released a paper where they were comparing the four biggest e-mail
> provider in Germany and how successful the most known viruses are >
> caught by the e-mail software.
What does 'most known' mean ?
> They were testing the following providers and virus software:
>
> http://www.1und1.de (S
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hello, Michael Shekman.
On 28.03.2004 17:48 you said the following:
| Hi,
|
| I have a strong suspicion, that none of incoming .zip attachments
| is scanned; how do I verify that?
Send this file - http://www.eicar.org/download/eicar_com.zip
to yoursel
>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 03/28/04 08:59AM >>>
On Sunday 28 March 2004 2:48 pm, Michael Shekman wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have a strong suspicion, that none of incoming .zip attachments is
> scanned; how do I verify that?
Send yourself an Eicar test string inside a zip file.
http://www.eicar.org/anti_vir
On Sunday 28 March 2004 3:20 pm, Michael Shekman wrote:
> I am using Postfix - Amavis-new - Clamav gateway setup, which is stopping
> most of the spam and all embedded viruses (the main mailserver is
> Groupwise). I believe that attachments are not scanned, because once in
> awhile users are getti
>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 03/28/04 09:09AM >>>
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hello, Michael Shekman.
On 28.03.2004 17:48 you said the following:
| Hi,
|
| I have a strong suspicion, that none of incoming .zip attachments
| is scanned; how do I verify that?
Send this file - http://
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hello, Michael Shekman.
On 28.03.2004 18:30 you said the following:
| Boris, spasibo!
Pozhaluista! :-)
| Eicar test is working fine. My ScanRAR was commented out, and I
| don't have ScanOLE2 entry - what is it?
ScanRAR is parameter for scan archive
From: "Fajar A. Nugraha" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sun, 28 Mar 2004 18:57:00 +0700
>/usr/include/sys/bitypes.h:84: warning: `int32_t' previously declared here
Looks like zziplib redeclare int8_t, int16_t, and int32_t
A quick-and-dirty way to fix this :
- backup zziplib/zzip-stdint.h
- edit it to r
From: Antony Stone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sun, 28 Mar 2004 09:23:24 +0100
> > The problem is mainly a lack of time. Over the years I've developed my own
> > customised mini-distribution based on 2.0. I simply don't have the time at
> > the moment to rebuild the entire distribution from scratch
On Sunday 28 March 2004 3:55 pm, Fred Flintstone wrote:
> My testing (on 2.4) does show that clamav
> is a worthwhile piece of software -- once it builds! :)
s/worthwhile/excellent/ IMHO
Antony.
--
90% of networking problems are routing problems.
9 of the remaining 10% are routing problems i
Fred Flintstone wrote:
Looks like zziplib redeclare int8_t, int16_t, and int32_t
A quick-and-dirty way to fix this :
- backup zziplib/zzip-stdint.h
- edit it to remove declarations of int*_t (by commenting or deleting
line 21, 26, and 33)
- compile clamav
- restore the backup after clamav compil
Fajar A. Nugraha wrote:
A little correction :
First, do a "make clean" to cleanup your previous build.
Try changing the line
dnl AC_CHECK_LIB(c, strtok_r,, AC_DEFINE(NO_STRTOK_R))
in configure.in to
AC_CHECK_LIB(c, strtok_r,, AC_DEFINE(NO_STRTOK_R))
then run aclocal, autconf, and automake.
I me
Folks,
First, sorry for the crossposting. I just want to be sure enought people
can do some feedback before commiting the document at the tldp.org CVS.
Addition:
- ClamAV
- Spamassassin
- Amavisd-new
- Upgraading cyrus-imapd from 2.1.x to 2.2.x
Updates:
- All software to most recent release
Plea
Hello Tomasz.
> What does 'most known' mean ?
Just the famous one, or as they call it on wildlist.org, the ones which were
submitted more than once...
> At least Symantec has full access to all WildList.org virus
> samples because that "independent" organization was founded,
> among others, by
On Sun, 14 Mar 2004 00:57:27 -0600 (CST)
Ryan Thompson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hi All,
>
> I'm using the following:
> clamd / ClamAV version devel-20040310
> ClamAV version devel-20040310, clamav-milter version 0.67j
> FreeBSD 4.9-RELEASE-p3
>
> though, I confirmed this problem was also
On Sun, 2004-03-28 at 15:45, Fred Flintstone wrote:
> Any other quick 'n' dirty suggestions for this one? :)
>
Have you tried just building a statically linked binary on a more recent
distro and seeing if it works on yours?
BMRB International
http://www.bmrb.co.uk
+44 (0)20 8566 5000
On So 28 Mrz 2004 03:45:02p Fred Flintstone wrote:
> /root/clam/clamav-0.68/libclamav/.libs/libclamav.so: undefined
> reference to `strtok_r' collect2: ld returned 1 exit status
Hi,
I had similar problems, here is a patch which could give a hint:
--- ./libclamav/mbox.c Wed Jan 28 11:15:24 2004
To install clamav-0.68 on a Linux 2.0-based distribution:
a) Back up /usr/include/sys/bitypes.h and remove these lines:
typedef /*signed*/ charint8_t;
typedef unsigned charu_int8_t;
typedef short int16_t;
typedef unsigned
Tomasz Kojm wrote to [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> On Sun, 14 Mar 2004 00:57:27 -0600 (CST)
> Ryan Thompson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >
> > Hi All,
> >
> > I'm using the following:
> > clamd / ClamAV version devel-20040310
> > ClamAV version devel-20040310, clamav-milter version 0.67j
> > FreeBSD 4.9-
Kevin Spicer wrote:
On Sun, 2004-03-28 at 15:45, Fred Flintstone wrote:
Any other quick 'n' dirty suggestions for this one? :)
Have you tried just building a statically linked binary on a more recent
distro and seeing if it works on yours?
BTW, how do you do that? using CFLAGS=-static
Clam scan claims to have found one infected file in the 8000+ files it
scanned. I sent this info to a log file so I can deal with the file, but I'm
not going to look at the entire list. I'd rather just search for the string
that clamscan appends to the end of the line to indicate an infected file.
Joseph A. Nagy, Jr. wrote:
Clam scan claims to have found one infected file in the 8000+ files it
scanned. I sent this info to a log file so I can deal with the file, but I'm
not going to look at the entire list. I'd rather just search for the string
that clamscan appends to the end of the line to
Joseph A. Nagy, Jr. wrote:
Clam scan claims to have found one infected file in the 8000+ files it
scanned. I sent this info to a log file so I can deal with the file, but I'm
not going to look at the entire list. I'd rather just search for the string
that clamscan appends to the end of the line to
Fajar A. Nugraha wrote:
Kevin Spicer wrote:
Have you tried just building a statically linked binary on a more recent
distro and seeing if it works on yours?
BTW, how do you do that? using CFLAGS=-static doesn't seem to work.
Replying my own post,
CFLAGS=-static ./configure && make && make insta
Luc de Louw wrote:
Please have a look at
http://www.delouw.ch/linux/Postfix-Cyrus-Web-cyradm-HOWTO/html/index.html
Feedback is very appreciated.
Hi Luc.
If you are writing some documentation, you _should_ read the another
before.
Your document says:
> I suggest to update the signatures wit
28 matches
Mail list logo
