|Main Archive Page > Month Archives > clamav-users archives|
At 02:09 PM 4/17/2010, Dan wrote:
>Those two lines look fairly clear to me. Essentially they're
>telling you to get moving, get the update onto your to-be-done
>list. This is, of course, re-enforced by the repeated EOL
>announcements on Clam-announce.
>>I can think of two other ways this could have been done, with very
>>little effort, and with little or no inconvenience to what you
>>would consider superior admins. That's irrelevant now, you've done
>>what you've done and it's not going to be undone.
>Yea, I agree, the Clam team probably could have done things better.
>But would more announcements or warnings have really made a
>difference? Why would the people, that regularly ignore the
>Freshclam warnings, pay attention?
>OTOH, I wonder how many of these upset admins have taken even
>partial responsibility - by admitting to their bosses that they
>failed to apply any updates to a critical piece of software, for over a YEAR?
You too seem to miss one very important point. It is not the ClamAV
project's place to judge and punish any failure by such admins. That
is soley up to the institution they have to report to.
As far as due diligence goes, ClamAV has done their part by
announcing the EOL of updates for ClamAV version before a certain
version ahead of time. They do not have any right to deliberately
mess with a running system...