FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Redhat > EPEL Development

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 01-25-2011, 04:41 PM
Fred Wittekind
 
Default EPEL 5 clamav update

Are there any plans to to update clamav to 0.96.x in EPEL 5? Are there
any technical or policy issues holding this up?

There is an bugzilla entry for it here (kinda old):
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=579370

Thanks in advance
Fred Wittekind

_______________________________________________
epel-devel-list mailing list
epel-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/epel-devel-list
 
Old 01-26-2011, 01:55 PM
Fred Wittekind
 
Default EPEL 5 clamav update

On 1/25/2011 12:41 PM, Fred Wittekind wrote:

Are there any plans to to update clamav to 0.96.x in EPEL 5? Are there
any technical or policy issues holding this up?

There is an bugzilla entry for it here (kinda old):
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=579370




Does this have something to do
with it?

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=573191




_______________________________________________
epel-devel-list mailing list
epel-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/epel-devel-list
 
Old 01-26-2011, 10:50 PM
Stephen John Smoogen
 
Default EPEL 5 clamav update

On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 07:55, Fred Wittekind <rom@twister.dyndns.org> wrote:
> This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
> --------------010002020006000007050201
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>
> On 1/25/2011 12:41 PM, Fred Wittekind wrote:
>> Are there any plans to to update clamav to 0.96.x in EPEL 5? *Are there
>> any technical or policy issues holding this up?
>>
>> There is an bugzilla entry for it here (kinda old):
>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=579370
>>
>>
> Does this have something to do with it?
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=573191

I think there are multiple reasons why it hasn't been updated, but not
sure what they are these days. I am cc'ing the maintainer to see if we
can work out a plan forward on this.



--
Stephen J Smoogen.
"The core skill of innovators is error recovery, not failure avoidance."
Randy Nelson, President of Pixar University.
"Let us be kind, one to another, for most of us are fighting a hard
battle." -- Ian MacLaren

_______________________________________________
epel-devel-list mailing list
epel-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/epel-devel-list
 
Old 01-27-2011, 12:32 AM
Fred Wittekind
 
Default EPEL 5 clamav update

On 01/26/2011 06:50 PM, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 07:55, Fred Wittekind <rom@twister.dyndns.org> wrote:
>> This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
>> --------------010002020006000007050201
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>>
>> On 1/25/2011 12:41 PM, Fred Wittekind wrote:
>>> Are there any plans to to update clamav to 0.96.x in EPEL 5? Are there
>>> any technical or policy issues holding this up?
>>>
>>> There is an bugzilla entry for it here (kinda old):
>>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=579370
>>>
>>>
>> Does this have something to do with it?
>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=573191
> I think there are multiple reasons why it hasn't been updated, but not
> sure what they are these days. I am cc'ing the maintainer to see if we
> can work out a plan forward on this.
>
>
>
I built a package on my own today so I could update the machines I
needed to. It's a copy of the Fedora package with some minor changes to
the spec file. I'll share the updates if that will help. I would
rather the updates come from EPEL, than maintaining it on my own. Had a
few problems with some of the macros (build sys difference I think),
most of the changes I had to make where pretty basic though. It already
had a flag for building without upstart support, but didn't have the
if/endif blocks in all the right places to make building without upstart
actually work, so fixed that. Also built with the bytecode flag set to
off (so that ClamAV gets built without llvm support), the bytecode
interpreter mode still works, but doesn't throw the SELinux error on
startup.

_______________________________________________
epel-devel-list mailing list
epel-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/epel-devel-list
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 04:06 PM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org