On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 14:21, Florian Weimer wrote:
> * Javier Fernandez-Sanguino:
>
>> This really sounds like there is a "use case" for data-only
>> "packages" that:
>
> Is clamav-data really data-only? Other AV software ships some sort of
> code even in signature updates (as opposed to engine
Le Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 02:13:38PM +0200, Javier Fernandez-Sanguino a écrit :
>
> This really sounds like there is a "use case" for data-only "packages" that:
>
> - do not include maintainer scripts (dpkg refuses to run them) or are
> only allowed a set of limited tasks (run in a restricted shell
* Javier Fernandez-Sanguino:
> This really sounds like there is a "use case" for data-only
> "packages" that:
Is clamav-data really data-only? Other AV software ships some sort of
code even in signature updates (as opposed to engine updates).
> - do not include maintainer scripts (dpkg refuses
2009/9/20 Henrique de Moraes Holschuh :
> On Sun, 20 Sep 2009, Marc Haber wrote:
>> As long as you do not expect me to manually sign every single upload,
>
> Why not? It is a package, it has root access anywhere it is being installed
> or removed. Even if you abuse the DM machinery to have a key
* Philipp Kern:
> On 2009-09-21, Hilko Bengen wrote:
>> I have written and maintained scripts that download signature file
>> updates for several commercial antivirus scanners and built packages for
>> them -- which is pretty much the same thing that clamav-getfiles does.
>> 10 updates to the sig
On Mon, 21 Sep 2009, James Vega wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 11:49 AM, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
> wrote:
> > On Mon, 21 Sep 2009, Marc Haber wrote:
> >> And people know that the package is built automatically. All users I
> >> know especially opted in to using the package instead of freshcl
On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 11:49 AM, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
wrote:
> On Mon, 21 Sep 2009, Marc Haber wrote:
>> And people know that the package is built automatically. All users I
>> know especially opted in to using the package instead of freshclam for
>> some-or-other reason.
>
> WHERE is that
On Mon, 21 Sep 2009, Marc Haber wrote:
> And people know that the package is built automatically. All users I
> know especially opted in to using the package instead of freshclam for
> some-or-other reason.
WHERE is that information published?
I don't see it in the package description, and I don'
On 2009-09-21, Hilko Bengen wrote:
> I have written and maintained scripts that download signature file
> updates for several commercial antivirus scanners and built packages for
> them -- which is pretty much the same thing that clamav-getfiles does.
> 10 updates to the signature files per day ar
* Henrique de Moraes Holschuh:
> On Sun, 20 Sep 2009, Marc Haber wrote:
>> As long as you do not expect me to manually sign every single upload,
> Why not?
ClamAV, like about every other antivirus scanner, is used to fight
rapidly moving targets. It relies on current -data files to provide any
On Mon, 21 Sep 2009 07:52:48 +0200, Luk Claes wrote:
>The time complaining in this thread could probably better spent by
>talking to ftpmas...@d.o and implementing a solution btw.
Why do I need to actively talk to ftpmaster when it's them wanting to
implement changes to a setup which has been imp
Marc Haber wrote:
> On Sun, 20 Sep 2009 18:28:30 -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
> wrote:
>> On Sun, 20 Sep 2009, Marc Haber wrote:
> No. The process runs on a virtual machine on a host privately owned
> and operated by the previous ftpmaster of Debian volatile, and was
> carefully designed in
On Sun, 20 Sep 2009 18:28:30 -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
wrote:
>On Sun, 20 Sep 2009, Marc Haber wrote:
>> As long as you do not expect me to manually sign every single upload,
>
>Why not?
Because nobody pays me to spend an hour a day to sign packages. We had
three full cycles since I wen
On Sun, 20 Sep 2009, Marc Haber wrote:
> As long as you do not expect me to manually sign every single upload,
Why not? It is a package, it has root access anywhere it is being installed
or removed. Even if you abuse the DM machinery to have a key restricted to
only upload clamav-data, it would
On Sun, 20 Sep 2009 17:10:45 +0200, Luk Claes wrote:
>Hmm, nothing is black and white. The current way of uploading
>clamav-data is suboptimal and ftpmasters don't want that to continue
>when volatile is integrated in the main archive. Though that does not
>mean there are no alternatives. Back the
Marc Haber wrote:
> On Sat, 19 Sep 2009 15:52:17 + (UTC), Philipp Kern
> wrote:
>> On 2009-09-19, Marc Haber wrote:
>>> On Fri, 18 Sep 2009 15:56:07 + (UTC), Philipp Kern
>>> wrote:
On 2009-09-18, Tom Feiner wrote:
> Looks like this method works well for clamav-data and other s
On Sat, 19 Sep 2009 15:52:17 + (UTC), Philipp Kern
wrote:
>On 2009-09-19, Marc Haber wrote:
>> On Fri, 18 Sep 2009 15:56:07 + (UTC), Philipp Kern
>> wrote:
>>>On 2009-09-18, Tom Feiner wrote:
Looks like this method works well for clamav-data and other similar
packages
whi
On 2009-09-19, Marc Haber wrote:
> On Fri, 18 Sep 2009 15:56:07 + (UTC), Philipp Kern
> wrote:
>>On 2009-09-18, Tom Feiner wrote:
>>> Looks like this method works well for clamav-data and other similar packages
>>> which needs to update databases frequently on stable/oldstable.
>>clamav-data
On Sat, 19 Sep 2009, Marc Haber wrote:
> Why does the person responsible for these uploads not know about this
> opposition? Why was the person doing the significant work not informed
> about the fact that every single minute put into the package is wasted
> anyway?
Because nothing happened yet a
On Fri, 18 Sep 2009 15:56:07 + (UTC), Philipp Kern
wrote:
>On 2009-09-18, Tom Feiner wrote:
>> Looks like this method works well for clamav-data and other similar packages
>> which needs to update databases frequently on stable/oldstable.
>
>clamav-data is scheduled for deletion as soon as vo
20 matches
Mail list logo
