This one time, at band camp, Michael Stone said: > On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 07:27:14PM +0100, Kurt Roeckx wrote: > >I think one the reason why clamav is in volatile is that the engine > >might need updating to detect new viruses. Is that something you > >want to support in stable-security? > > I think there's a couple of questions to answer: > 1) is there any point in deploying a virus scanner with outdated > definitions? Not in my opinion. > 2) is volatile well known enough that everyone installing a virus > scanner with debian is using the version in volatile? Sadly, no. We still get people using the version shipped in etch on #clamav and the clamav-users list, although the numbers are going down over time. I'm hoping that the lenny release will help, as volatile is more likely to end up in people's sources.list. -- ----------------------------------------------------------------- | ,''`. Stephen Gran | | : :' : sgran@debian.org | | `. `' Debian user, admin, and developer | | `- http://www.debian.org | -----------------------------------------------------------------
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature