Re: [tlug] ClamAV

[CL <az.4tlug@example.com>]

Jonathan Byrne wrote:
> On 10/12/2007, "CL" <az.4tlug@example.com> wrote:
>
> > in my search to remove my newbiosity. I am victimizing myself with
> > Kubuntu 7.04.
>
> Kubuntu 7.10 release candidate is out, if you want to further victimize
> yourself ;)

I have it on The Partition We Don't Tell Our Neighbors About.  I have
7.04 on the partition that boots automatically and 7.10 on the one that
has to be manually started from Grub.  The way the newer version handles
kanji is head and shoulders above 7.04 -- nice, clear, and crisp.  I
have not set up Wine or Scim, but am thinking of doing so.

> You're probably on reasonably safe ground to ignore those warnings,
> since:
>
> -Linux distributors often backport patches, so they may or may be
> actually out of date

That was my thinking -- if it works that is not necessarily a Bad Thing.
But, I would still like to understand the cause of the failed
installation as an education exercise, if nothing else. The failure is
consistent no matter what I have tried, including reinstalling the
packages that the log file says are not "sane".

I'd like to know more about this and whether there is a fix that doesn't 
involve ignoring the problem or nuking the offending file.

> I'm inferring from this that you're trying to build .deb source
> packages under Kubuntu?
>
> Or are you building from source tarballs?

Neither that I am aware of.  When I start KlamAv it tells me that KlamAv
and ClamAv are out of date and asks if I want to download the latest
version.  It then asks if I want to use the GUI-based installer ... and
magic happens ... or not, as the report shows.

> WRT Firestarter, I've never used it, but isn't it just a frontend for
> iptables, producing an iptables script that runs at startup?

It seems to be that, too.  But it has a number of other filtering
features / capabilities recognizable to someone who has configured a
software firewall in WIN a time or twenty.

> That said, I'll leave determining whether or not Firestarter is actually
> leaving you with a functioning set of iptables rules to someone familiar
> with it :)

I believe that it may be ... but I have been wrong before.  I welcome 
other information.

--
CL