On Sun, Jan 23, 2005 at 01:43:27AM +0100, Adrian Zaugg said: > Hi Stephen > > Stephen Gran wrote: > >Adrian, there is a new version available for sarge at > >http://people.debian.org/~sgran - would you mind testing them for me? > > No, actually not...just... > > >They are almost identical to the debs going into sid, except that the > >sid ones are stuck in the queue for a little while, so any testing > >would be delayed. > > Some concern arises: The server I see the error is a "production" > machine with Sarge. Can I revert to the "old" package, if the newer > clamd fails? Does the new package run on Sarge?
There are very few packaging differences, aside from splitting out the documentation into a seperate package. I have done up and downgrades of this version without a problem. I do really believe that a downgrade would be seamless, except that dpkg would warn that you are forcing a downgrade. The packages on my site at people.debian.org do definitely run on sarge - they were built in a testing chroot. The upside is that the debs on people.debian.org/~sgran are the same (built with the same toolchain and they have the same maintainer scripts) as the ones that will go through official debian channels - any bugs present in them will also be present in the debian packages. The downside is that by testing them, you skip the normal unstable - testing migration path, that is supposed to catch severe bugs before they make it to testing. I have the new version running on my MX, and several at work, and they are running on the clamav.net list servers. So far, so good, and I expect it to go well - the ClamAV upstream has been a very good team as far as only releasing when they believe it stable. All that being said, the official stance is that downgrades are not strictly supported, so I can't ask you to do something you aren't comfortable with. It would help me figure out if they have already caught this bug, and it may potentially give you better virus protection earlier than through normal channels. So, if you feel uncomfortable, I understand - we'll revisit the issue in a few weeks, when the official packages make it to sarge. The reason I was asking is that if the bug they have fixed upstream is _not_ the bug you are experiencing, it would be good to catch it and fix it before 0.81 stabilizes, and for that, a couple of weeks may be too long. Take care, and thanks for all your help in any case, -- -------------------------------------------------------------------------- | Stephen Gran | <Omnic> another .sig addition | | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | | | http://www.lobefin.net/~steve | | --------------------------------------------------------------------------
pgpz4SOphHR3y.pgp
Description: PGP signature
