BUG: clamav packages badly broken

Kevin Fenzi kevin at tummy.com
Sat Dec 29 19:04:16 UTC 2007

On Fri, 28 Dec 2007 13:47:31 -0800
florin at andrei.myip.org (Florin Andrei) wrote:

> Just a few quick observations:
> I am trying to use clamd with amavis and Postfix. Amavis is supposed
> to pass the attachments to clamd via a Unix socket. That's how it
> worked for a while with the clamav packages made by Dag Wieers, no
> problems at all.
> Today I uninstalled Dag's packages and installed the EPEL ones
> instead. Big mistake.

Are you using amavis packages from dag? or amavisd-new from
epel/fedora? The two versions are very tied to the clamav version from
the same repo. 

> Why is the package failing to work after install? Why it doesn't just 
> work? Why the over-engineered customization with <SERVICE>?

amavisd-new from fedora/epel should just work out of the box. 
It has the clamd start script in it due to the way the clamav package
in fedora is setup. 

> After installing clamav-server and the related packages, the stuff 
> should Just Work (TM). It should not require dozens of obscure
> tweaks. What's the point in having a package otherwise?

I would totally agree. 

> ...snipp...

> How did these packages go through the verifications before being made 
> public?

These have been in fedora for ages... 

> Meanwhile my mail server can either be offline, or without an
> antivirus. Merry Christmas. :-(


So, let me recap what I know and perhaps someone will think of a
brilliant solution: 

- The fedora clamav maintainer wants to do things the way the package
is currently setup. They don't want to change it to be more simple/easy
to understand, or fix it to be more usable. This package meets all the
package guidelines. 

- I attempted to setup a clamav for epel that was based on the dag
rpms. However, amavisd-new, klamav, and other packages in fedora (and
thus epel) depend on clamav being packaged in the way that it is. This
would mean all those other packages would have to rework their specs
for the clamav package. 

- The amavisd-new maintainer in fedora/epel reluctantly agreed to
maintain the fedora version in EPEL. 

So, I don't see much way out... we go with the version currently in
fedora/epel, unless someone can talk the maintainer (and the
maintainers of all the dependent packages) into changing the package. 

Any other ideas? 


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/epel-devel-list/attachments/20071229/82638554/attachment.sig>

More information about the epel-devel-list mailing list