martin f krafft wrote: > also sprach Andreas Barth <aba@not.so.argh.org> [2004.10.04.2336 +0200]: > > Frankly speaking, the question whether to include clamav or not in > > sarge is IMHO not a question whether volatile exists or not. > > Either clamav is stable enough to be part of a stable release or > > not. > > I think you are missing the point. > > clamav can be as stable as a rock but be completely useless... when > two months after Sarge's release, a new virus hits hard, and in > order to detect it, clamav needs libfoo, which is not in Debian. > What then? *Maybe* we could push a new clamav via security.d.o, but > what about libfoo? How could clamav possibly have a stable engine and suddenly start to need libfoo? Are specialized virus-detection libraries that common? Thiemo
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature