[clamav-users] [Clamav-devel] ClamAV(R) blog: ClamAV 0.102.0 Release Candidate is now available
Franky Van Liedekerke
liedekef at telenet.be
Mon Oct 7 10:17:37 EDT 2019
I'm always willing to test. However, I don't think freshclam and
clamsubmit need newer libcurl versions, so I guess - if changes are
need - that only clamonacc needs to be reviewed (for the linking
With friendly regards,
Op Maandag, 07-10-2019 om 16:08 schreef Micah Snyder (micasnyd):
Perhaps there is something we can do to make it easier to statically
link libcurl, specifically, with freshclam, clamsubmit, and clamonacc.
On 10/7/19, 9:22 AM, "clamav-users on behalf of Franky Van
Liedekerke via clamav-users" wrote:
Op Maandag, 07-10-2019 om 14:18 schreef J.R. via clamav-users:
> > This particular hard requirement (libcurl) affects the
> > which is different than causing the code to fail to run at
all. So the question
> > is do the new libcurl requirements immediately break
existing systems that are
> > not yet updated with new libcurl functionality. It is kind
of a big deal to
> > update a widely used library and creates knock-on problems
from ripple effect
> > for production systems subject to strong configuration
> It's only a requirement for a new feature...
I'd like to disagree here: it is a new implementation for an
existing feature (on-access scanning).
There was already a remark in a redhat bugzilla request to
disable on-access for the epel-build for 0.102 (on which I commented,
since that would impact a lot of users).
I won't go into the discussion of supporting "old" libraries
on "old OS's" again, but for enterprise users (RHEL 6/7, Centos,
Ubuntu LTS, ...) this is a bit of a problem (since the libcurl lib is
also provided by the OS vendor itself).
clamav-users mailing list
clamav-users at lists.clamav.net
Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide:
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the clamav-users