On 25 Feb 2004, at 08:02, Bob George wrote:
Dallman Ross <dman(_at_)nomotek(_dot_)com> wrote:
"They" who say that? I don't know, but either one can get
clam(d)scan to work or not on a particular system, would be
the point. We had lots of trouble getting it to compile right
on NetBSD where I am. But privately a friend I put up to it
on that system got it to work, just last night. My point is
only that if the compile works, then it works, right? There
is certainly a flurry of ongoing development with it, sure,
but it will probably only get better, quickly. I also think
it's a good product.
Just an aside: We got off on a bit of a tangent trying to get clamav
directly from procmail. There are plenty of scripts (perl and shell)
be used as wrappers to get it to work reliably and as expected from
The trick is to decode attachments, then scan them. Unfortunately,
web page that says "DO THIS", so it was a bit of trial-and-error.
Then it might be a good idea to write up your experiences as a
procmail/vlamav how-to for the next person. I say this not out of a
desire for the readme itself (I simply block dangerous attachments and
let people live with their screweups if they open zips) but rather so
we can simply point the next person to your comprehensive how-to :)
I'll even host it for you if a permanent web location is an issue.
It was intended that when Newspeak had been adopted once and for all
and Oldspeak forgotten, a heretical thought...should be literally
unthinkable, at least so far as thought is dependent on words.
procmail mailing list