On Sat, 29 Dec 2007 22:40:22 +0100
bugs.michael(a)gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) wrote:
On Sat, 29 Dec 2007 14:06:13 -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> - freshclam should work when the package is installed. Currently it
> requires you to comment a line in a script for no reason I can
Cannot find this in bugzilla. The /etc/sysconfig script disables the
automatic update on purpose (to prevent unauthorized network access)
and warns the user about that default. What is wrong with that?
Where is there a requirement that network access should require
configuration changes? Should we modify any other network accessing
services to require a config change before using the network?
What good would clamav be on a machine thats not on a network and what
good is it with no up 2 date virus definitions?
> - freshclam should not mail
> any output.
Is this in bugzilla?
It also mails warnings and errors.
No, I can file it I suppose.
> - freshclam should be set to use your local country mirror for
Is this in bugzilla?
No. I can file it I suppose.
> - The milter should work with postfix.
> - The subpackages should be reduced and named in a way that an
> user could possibly know what they need to install for the
> functionality they are looking for. For example, the upstream docs
> and every other package talks about the 'freshclam' update program,
> it's not easy to know that in fedora thats in the 'clamav-update'
Just a %doc issue so far, IMO. Unless it is ruled that clamav
must be in a single package.
Well, I agree it's a matter of package maintainers desires, but I don't
think all the docs in the world will help. This thread is proof of
> - The useless 'sysv' subpackages should be folded into
> subpackages until such a time as fedora stops using sysvinit by
> - clamscan looks for a /etc/clamd.conf file for config options,
> which is not in that place. If it was it wouldn't work because it
> needs a line commented before it's a valid config file.
I guess I should file this as well.
> - The package could not remove the clamav user on removal.
This I guess is part of the fedora-usermanagement setup.
> I'm sure I could look around for more issues.
> > Why can't a volunteer create and maintain a clamav configuration
> > add-on package, which offers a single system-wide clamav daemon if
> > that is requested by the clamav user base in Fedora/EPEL?
> I suppose someone could... thats not my issue however. My issues
> are in the clamav package itself, not just not having a system wide
The list is interesting, but it adds more than what I thought has
been the primary (only?) issue with the Fedora clamav packages.
Really? So the only real issue you see is that there is no system wide