-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dennis Peterson
Sent: Sonntag, 22. Mai 2005 06:58
To: ClamAV users ML
Subject: RE: [Clamav-users] Re: sol8 compile problem
Cocoon said:
> Hi Dennis,...
>
> Great it works fine!
>
>
> Greez
Which steps did
Joe Maimon wrote:
I can probably send a patch if you would like.
Joe
___
http://lists.clamav.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/clamav-users
This patch still works...can someone tell me whether this is up for
consideration?
#! /bin/sh /usr/share/dpatc
I have two clamav-milters running on a system. The sendmail on this
system can choose which email gets scanned by which milter.
One is set to send notifications, to be used for automatically
blacklisting virus sending sources.
The other does not notify because it is used by sendmail to scan e
Looks like since Clamav 0.84, clamav-milter is crashing every time
fleshclam get new definitions. I am running clamav on BSD/OS 4.3.1
___
http://lurker.clamav.net/list/clamav-users.html
Dave Shariff Yadallee - System Administrator a.k.a. The Root of the
Problem said:
> Looks like since Clamav 0.84, clamav-milter is crashing every time
> fleshclam get new definitions. I am running clamav on BSD/OS 4.3.1
It's probably trying to tell you your From: address is too long, eh.
dp
___
bash-3.00# uname -a
NetBSD 2.0.2 NetBSD 2.0.2 (GENERIC) #0: Thu Mar 24 02:28:37 MST 2005
root@:/usr/obj/sys/arch/amd64/compile/GENERIC amd64
bash-3.00# clamscan -V
ClamAV 0.84/889/Sun May 22 04:18:49 2005
I've been noticing several clamscan processes running, taking up 100%
of the CPU. Some have
On Sun, 22 May 2005 18:48:53 +
lattera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> bash-3.00# clamscan -V
> ClamAV 0.84/889/Sun May 22 04:18:49 2005
[...]
> and I love the product you guys have spent time making.
I don't think so. Actually you have no respect to our work and time.
The problem described by
On May 20, 2005, at 19:02, Stephen Gran wrote:
On Fri, May 20, 2005 at 08:49:32PM -0500, Damian Menscher said:
On Fri, 20 May 2005, Doug Hardie wrote:
On May 20, 2005, at 02:32, Trog wrote:
The accept call is done within Sendmail, I believe.
That would make sense except that the error
Hi
We have a fairly big sendmail+clamav+clamav-milter setup, with 15000+
accounts.
Since last week we are experimenting several errors with this combination.
Tried to upgrade to latest version, with same results, so now we downgraded
to our last "stable" situation, running clamav and milter ve
why would you say that I have no respect? The only reason why I'm
using an old version is because that's what's in NetBSD's pkgsrc tree.
I'm sorry if I bothered any of you with my email. Thanks for
responding.
Shawn Webb
On 5/22/05, Tomasz Kojm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, 22 May 2005 18:
scratch that, it's been updated in the tree since my last cvs up,
which was around two weeks ago.
Shawn Webb
On 5/23/05, lattera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> why would you say that I have no respect? The only reason why I'm
> using an old version is because that's what's in NetBSD's pkgsrc tree.
pkgsrc tree is up to 0.85, not 0.85.1. After upgrading, within ten
minutes I've got two processes taking up 100% of the CPU. So unless
it's been fixed in 0.85.1, I'm still having the problem.
Shawn Webb
On 5/23/05, lattera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> scratch that, it's been updated in the tree s
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi
We have a fairly big sendmail+clamav+clamav-milter setup, with 15000+
accounts.
Since last week we are experimenting several errors with this combination.
Tried to upgrade to latest version, with same results, so now we downgraded
to our last "stable" situation,
On Sun, 22 May 2005, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We have a fairly big sendmail+clamav+clamav-milter setup, with 15000+
accounts.
What OS (be specific) and hardware?
Do the failures have a strong time correlation with database updates?
Damian Menscher
--
-=#| Physics Grad Student & SysAdmin @ U
lattera wrote:
> why would you say that I have no respect? The only reason why I'm
> using an old version
It's not the version, it's the tone of your message:
> I would appreciate that this problem be addressed immediately and
> fixed quickly, as every few hours the server (3.2Ghz!) slows to a
15 matches
Mail list logo
