[...] > > > > We had discussed this during the Security Team meeting in Essen: We believe > > clamav shouldn't be included in stable; malware scan engines are a constantly > > moving target and it's pointless to backport changes since new signatures > > constantly require new scan engine features all the time. So moving it to > > volatile is the best solution for everyone. > Ehm, its not a solution for me to move dansguardian to volatile only. It > guess that counts for other applications that link against clamav too. > Would you mind adding the rationale why this is not a solution for you? I'm not claiming that moving to volatile indeed is a solution, but getting some more insight would be nice. Thanks, Michael
Attachment:
pgpW4mkLpqup7.pgp
Description: PGP signature