clamd handicraft work

[lonely wolf]

Steven Pritchard wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 20, 2005 at 07:54:43AM -0700, Nathan Grennan wrote:
> 
>>On Wed, 2005-07-20 at 08:39 -0500, Steven Pritchard wrote:
>>
>>>I don't really think that's a good idea.  The amavisd-new package I'm
>>>working on includes all the clamav integration.
>>
>>  By making it a separate package you allow the user choice. Not all
>>people will want to use clamav, and so adding it to the amavisd-new
>>package seems like a bad idea. Personally I use clamav and uvscan. I did
>>set clamav-amavis to require amavisd-new.
correct

> 
> 
> I've thought about this before, and I can't think of a good reason for
> amavisd-new not to require clamav.  If the daemon isn't running,
> amavisd-new will skip it, so nobody is forcing anyone to *use* clamav,
> just install it.
I am far from being an expert and I might be psychotic or paranoid, but I 
really really love to NOT be forced to install a package which I know for sure 
I will not use.
That's one of the reasons I always recompile mc before installing it on servers 
(which never run X). The "current" (i.e. for several years..) version of mc.rpm 
always pulls in X libs.

The issue is NOT that amavis will skip clamav if the daemon is not running. The 
issue is that you are forcing the user(s) to install a package, which might go 
un-noticed in case of security announces ("I am not using it, why should I care 
about it?")