Mailing List Archive

[clamav-users] ClamAV® blog: ClamAV 0.104.0 Second Release Candidate is here!
https://blog.clamav.net/2021/08/clamav-01040-second-release-candidate.html<https://blog.clamav.net/2021/08/clamav-01040-second-release-candidate.html?m=1>

ClamAV 0.104.0 Second Release Candidate is here!

Today we are publishing a second release candidate for 0.104.0. Please help us verify that 0.104.0-rc2 works on your systems and that we have resolved the concerns you reported with the first release candidate. We need your feedback, so let us know what you find and join us on the ClamAV mailing list<https://lists.clamav.net/mailman/listinfo/clamav-users>, or on our Discord<https://discord.gg/sGaxA5Q>.

In particular, we'd love your feedback on the new Debian and RPM packages (see below) and on the install documentation on docs.clamav.net<https://docs.clamav.net/manual/Installing.html>.

For details about what is new in the 0.104 feature release, please refer to the announcement for the first release candidate<https://blog.clamav.net/2021/07/clamav-01040-release-candidate-is-here.html>.

What changed since the first release candidate

First and foremost, we are listening to your concerns about the build system change from Autotools to CMake, and about changes coming in a future feature release when we add the Rust programming language toolchain into our build requirements. We can't bring back Autotools, but we hope that the following will help.

1. We are introducing a Long Term Support (LTS) program that will begin with the 0.103 feature release. Users will be required to stay up to date with the latest patch versions (e.g., 0.103.3) within the 0.103 feature series, but will have the peace-of-mind that the 0.103 feature release will receive critical patch versions with a stable ABI up until End-of-Life in September 2023. Stay tuned for a separate blog post introducing the full details of our LTS program. We will also add a version-support-matrix to our online documentation in tandem with the LTS blog post for easy reference.

2. We plan to increase our feature release cadence to make it easier to plan and to get new features and efficacy improvements into your hands faster. So, to make it easier for you to stay up-to-date with the latest stable release, we are introducing new package installers for macOS and for RPM-based and Debian-based Linux distributions. These new packages will be available for download on the clamav.net Downloads page<https://www.clamav.net/downloads>. You can find installation instructions for these packages in our online documentation<https://docs.clamav.net/manual/Installing.html#installing-with-an-installer>. Please note that the Linux packages unfortunately do not include clamav-milter at this time, and that we are still working on the signing & notarization process for the macOS installer, so it may not work for users on the latest macOS version.

In addition to the above, we've resolved the following issues identified during the first release candidate:

* Increased the functionality level (FLEVEL) for the 0.104 release to make space for additional 0.103 (LTS) patch versions. See the Version & FLEVEL reference<https://docs.clamav.net/appendix/FunctionalityLevels.html>.
* Improvements installation instructions in INSTALL.md and in the online documentation<https://docs.clamav.net/Introduction.html>.
* Fixed iconv / libiconv detection in the CMake configuration process when -Werror=return-type is enabled, such as in the openSUSE packaging environment. See PR-233<https://github.com/Cisco-Talos/clamav/pull/233>.
* Fixed broken CMake build when RAR support is intentionally disabled and test-support is enabled. See PR-237<https://github.com/Cisco-Talos/clamav/pull/237>.
* Fixed broken CMake build on systems that do not provide format string macros for standard integer types. See PR-231<https://github.com/Cisco-Talos/clamav/pull/231>.
* Improved long file path support on Windows. (Disclaimer: presently requires user to opt-in with a registry key change). See PR-229<https://github.com/Cisco-Talos/clamav/pull/229>.
* Fixed a segfault and socket file descriptor leak in ClamOnAcc. See PR-227<https://github.com/Cisco-Talos/clamav/pull/227>.
* Fixed an error reported by ClamD when scanning directories on Windows. See PR-230<https://github.com/Cisco-Talos/clamav/pull/230>.
* Fixed issue with Freshclam support for Universal Naming Convention (UNC) paths on Windows. See PR-226<https://github.com/Cisco-Talos/clamav/pull/226>.
* Added missing environment variable feature documentation to the manpages. See PR-254<https://github.com/Cisco-Talos/clamav/pull/254>.
* Fixed an assortment of issues identified by Coverity static analysis. See PR-221<https://github.com/Cisco-Talos/clamav/pull/221>.
* Tuned the Valgrind suppression rules for the public test suite to resolve a false positive that caused intermittent ClamD test failures. See PR-238<https://github.com/Cisco-Talos/clamav/pull/238>.
* Fixed the mspack library name to deconflict with system installed mspack packages. See PR-234<https://github.com/Cisco-Talos/clamav/pull/234>.
* Fixed a false positive in the ClamD tests, reported by Valgrind when compiling with Clang. See PR-236<https://github.com/Cisco-Talos/clamav/pull/236>.

Special thanks to Arjen de Korte and Mark Fortescue for contributing patches to fix some of the above issues. And thank you to so many of you who chimed in on the mailing lists, on Discord, and on GitHub Issues to identify issues and share your experiences with the first release candidate.
Re: [clamav-users] ClamAV? blog: ClamAV 0.104.0 Second Release Candidate is here! [ In reply to ]
Hi there,

On Thu, 19 Aug 2021, Joel Esler (jesler) via clamav-users wrote:

> ... Please note that the Linux packages unfortunately do not include
> clamav-milter ...

Please can you confirm that you really do mean "Linux packages"?

--

73,
Ged.

_______________________________________________

clamav-users mailing list
clamav-users@lists.clamav.net
https://lists.clamav.net/mailman/listinfo/clamav-users


Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide:
https://github.com/vrtadmin/clamav-faq

http://www.clamav.net/contact.html#ml
Re: [clamav-users] ClamAV® blog: ClamAV 0.104.0 Second Release Candidate is here! [ In reply to ]
* Joel Esler (jesler) via clamav-users <clamav-users@lists.clamav.net>:

> [cid:7F6A7E38-0C10-460C-A542-B8AD5C969E5E-L0-001]

Indeed; I installed clamav-0.104.0-rc2.linux.x86_64.deb, and then
checked - it seems to be missing:

$ dpkg -L clamav |fgrep -i milter
/usr/local/share/man/man5/clamav-milter.conf.5
/usr/local/share/man/man8/clamav-milter.8

$ dpkg -L clamav |egrep -i "/(bin|lib)/"
/usr/local/bin/clamav-config
/usr/local/bin/clambc
/usr/local/bin/clamconf
/usr/local/bin/clamdscan
/usr/local/bin/clamdtop
/usr/local/bin/clamscan
/usr/local/bin/clamsubmit
/usr/local/bin/freshclam
/usr/local/bin/sigtool
/usr/local/lib/libclamav.so.9.1.0
/usr/local/lib/libclammspack.so.0.8.0
/usr/local/lib/libclamunrar.so.5.7.5
/usr/local/lib/libclamunrar_iface.so.9.1.0
/usr/local/lib/libfreshclam.so.2.0.2
/usr/local/lib/pkgconfig
/usr/local/lib/pkgconfig/libclamav.pc
/usr/local/lib/libclamav.so
/usr/local/lib/libclamav.so.9
/usr/local/lib/libclammspack.so
/usr/local/lib/libclammspack.so.0
/usr/local/lib/libclamunrar.so
/usr/local/lib/libclamunrar.so.5
/usr/local/lib/libclamunrar_iface.so
/usr/local/lib/libclamunrar_iface.so.9
/usr/local/lib/libfreshclam.so
/usr/local/lib/libfreshclam.so.2


Ralf Hildebrandt
Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin
Geschäftsbereich IT | Abteilung Netzwerk

Campus Benjamin Franklin (CBF)
Haus I | 1. OG | Raum 105
Hindenburgdamm 30 | D-12203 Berlin

Tel. +49 30 450 570 155
ralf.hildebrandt@charite.de
https://www.charite.de

_______________________________________________

clamav-users mailing list
clamav-users@lists.clamav.net
https://lists.clamav.net/mailman/listinfo/clamav-users


Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide:
https://github.com/vrtadmin/clamav-faq

http://www.clamav.net/contact.html#ml
Re: [clamav-users] ClamAV® blog: ClamAV 0.104.0 Second Release Candidate is here! [ In reply to ]
Citeren "Joel Esler (jesler) via clamav-users"
<clamav-users@lists.clamav.net>:

> https://blog.clamav.net/2021/08/clamav-01040-second-release-candidate.html<https://blog.clamav.net/2021/08/clamav-01040-second-release-candidate.html?m=1>
>
> ClamAV 0.104.0 Second Release Candidate is here!
>
> Today we are publishing a second release candidate for 0.104.0.
> Please help us verify that 0.104.0-rc2 works on your systems and
> that we have resolved the concerns you reported with the first
> release candidate. We need your feedback, so let us know what you
> find and join us on the ClamAV mailing

With a few tweaks, seems to be building fine in openSUSE Tumbleweed.
One exception, is the upgrade test (?) seems to be running from a
fixed port (8001). The test seems to fail occasionally, if multiple
instances build on the same buildserver at the same time. I haven't
looked too closely yet (I'm on holiday right now, so shell access is
limited to mobile phone), but this may be an issue. It might help to
add random back-off times when starting te server fails to open port
8001 initially and retry later.


_______________________________________________

clamav-users mailing list
clamav-users@lists.clamav.net
https://lists.clamav.net/mailman/listinfo/clamav-users


Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide:
https://github.com/vrtadmin/clamav-faq

http://www.clamav.net/contact.html#ml
Re: [clamav-users] ClamAV® blog: ClamAV 0.104.0 Second Release Candidate is here! [ In reply to ]
On 8/20/2021 9:46 AM, Arjen de Korte via clamav-users wrote:
> Citeren "Joel Esler (jesler) via clamav-users" <clamav-users@lists.clamav.net>:
>
>> https://blog.clamav.net/2021/08/clamav-01040-second-release-candidate.html<https://blog.clamav.net/2021/08/clamav-01040-second-release-candidate.html?m=1>
>>
>>
>> ClamAV 0.104.0 Second Release Candidate is here!
>>
>> Today we are publishing a second release candidate for 0.104.0. Please help us
>> verify that 0.104.0-rc2 works on your systems and that we have resolved the
>> concerns you reported with the first release candidate. We need your feedback, so
>> let us know what you find and join us on the ClamAV mailing

I built from source on CentOS 7 using the "-D ENABLE_MILTER=OFF" flag.  The initial
cmake run complained about wanting a static json-c library, and the build gave a ton
of warnings, but ctest passed all of the tests.

I'm not going to put it into production, but I did want to report on the results of
the build.

--
Bowie

_______________________________________________

clamav-users mailing list
clamav-users@lists.clamav.net
https://lists.clamav.net/mailman/listinfo/clamav-users


Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide:
https://github.com/vrtadmin/clamav-faq

http://www.clamav.net/contact.html#ml
Re: [clamav-users] ClamAV® blog: ClamAV 0.104.0 Second Release Candidate is here! [ In reply to ]
On Thu, 19 Aug 2021 20:41:01 +0000, Joel Esler \(jesler\) via
clamav-users stated:
>ClamAV 0.104.0 Second Release Candidate is here!

Is there any specific reason that you do not have a FreeBSD package
available?

--
Jerry

_______________________________________________

clamav-users mailing list
clamav-users@lists.clamav.net
https://lists.clamav.net/mailman/listinfo/clamav-users


Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide:
https://github.com/vrtadmin/clamav-faq

http://www.clamav.net/contact.html#ml
Re: [clamav-users] ClamAV® blog: ClamAV 0.104.0 Second Release Candidate is here! [ In reply to ]
Hello Jerry.

From: Jerry Seibert via clamav-users <clamav-users@lists.clamav.net>
Subject: Re: [clamav-users] ClamAV® blog: ClamAV 0.104.0 Second Release Candidate is here!
Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2021 06:43:18 -0400

> On Thu, 19 Aug 2021 20:41:01 +0000, Joel Esler \(jesler\) via
> clamav-users stated:
>>ClamAV 0.104.0 Second Release Candidate is here!
>
> Is there any specific reason that you do not have a FreeBSD package
> available?

At first, ClamAV team don't provide ClamAV package for FreeBSD. It is
provided by FreeBSD project as one of FreeBSD ports/packages
collections. And I'm current maintainer of ClamAV port/package.

Next, currently only release version of ClavAV port/package is
provided. So if you use official FreeBSD ports/packages, you can't use
release candidate of ClamAV.

And at last, though there isn't release candidate of ClamAV in
official FreeBSD ports/packages, I have ported 0.104.0.rc2 and
committed it to my working repostory on GitHub.

https://github.com/yasuhirokimura/freebsd-ports/tree/clamav

So if you don't mind building package by yourself, You can test latest
release candidate of ClamAV on FreeBSD by checking out ports tree,
building packages by yourself and installing it to your systems.

Please keep in mind thet above ports tree is private working branch.
That is, it will be updated to next release candidate if it is
released. It will be updated to 0.104.0 release when it is release.
And it will be removed from the repository after official FreeBSD
ClamAV port/package is updated to 0.104.0 release.

---
Yasuhiro Kimura

_______________________________________________

clamav-users mailing list
clamav-users@lists.clamav.net
https://lists.clamav.net/mailman/listinfo/clamav-users


Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide:
https://github.com/vrtadmin/clamav-faq

http://www.clamav.net/contact.html#ml
Re: [clamav-users] ClamAV? blog: ClamAV 0.104.0 Second Release Candidate is here! [ In reply to ]
Thanks for the report Bowie.

Yes, static json-c library is recommended to prevent possible crashes in downstream applications that use other json libs (like libjansson, others), but it will work with a shared json-c lib if needed.


Micah Snyder
ClamAV Development
Talos
Cisco Systems, Inc.
________________________________
From: clamav-users <clamav-users-bounces@lists.clamav.net> on behalf of Bowie Bailey via clamav-users <clamav-users@lists.clamav.net>
Sent: Friday, August 20, 2021 7:29 AM
To: clamav-users@lists.clamav.net <clamav-users@lists.clamav.net>
Cc: Bowie Bailey <Bowie_Bailey@BUC.com>
Subject: Re: [clamav-users] ClamAV? blog: ClamAV 0.104.0 Second Release Candidate is here!

On 8/20/2021 9:46 AM, Arjen de Korte via clamav-users wrote:
> Citeren "Joel Esler (jesler) via clamav-users" <clamav-users@lists.clamav.net>:
>
>> https://blog.clamav.net/2021/08/clamav-01040-second-release-candidate.html<https://blog.clamav.net/2021/08/clamav-01040-second-release-candidate.html?m=1>
>>
>>
>> ClamAV 0.104.0 Second Release Candidate is here!
>>
>> Today we are publishing a second release candidate for 0.104.0. Please help us
>> verify that 0.104.0-rc2 works on your systems and that we have resolved the
>> concerns you reported with the first release candidate. We need your feedback, so
>> let us know what you find and join us on the ClamAV mailing

I built from source on CentOS 7 using the "-D ENABLE_MILTER=OFF" flag. The initial
cmake run complained about wanting a static json-c library, and the build gave a ton
of warnings, but ctest passed all of the tests.

I'm not going to put it into production, but I did want to report on the results of
the build.

--
Bowie

_______________________________________________

clamav-users mailing list
clamav-users@lists.clamav.net
https://lists.clamav.net/mailman/listinfo/clamav-users


Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide:
https://github.com/vrtadmin/clamav-faq

http://www.clamav.net/contact.html#ml
Re: [clamav-users] ClamAV? blog: ClamAV 0.104.0 Second Release Candidate is here! [ In reply to ]
While testing what?s in the x64 windows portable zip file (clamav-0.104.0-rc2.win.x64.zip), I make the following observations:

1) Total executables and dlls goes down from 71 previously to 30 in 0.104.0 ? This is likely a good sign.
2) The zip file includes 5 lib files which serve no purpose and probably should be removed. Hmm I was going to say the same thing about the provided include directory, but then maybe both could be useful for locally built and linked programs. I?m not testing anything like this? None of these files were in the portable packages for prior versions.
3) Previous portable zip files included a README.md, a NEWS.md and UserManual.html (in addition to what?s in the now html directory which previously was called UserManual). I never worried about what?s in these files or directories, but now they?re very different.
4) Otherwise, freshclam and clamd operate normally in my environment and are now in production. If anything surprising happens, I?ll raise the problem here.


* Mark Pizzolato

From: clamav-users <clamav-users-bounces@lists.clamav.net<mailto:clamav-users-bounces@lists.clamav.net>> On Behalf Of Joel Esler (jesler) via clamav-users
Sent: Thursday, August 19, 2021 1:41 PM
To: ClamAV users ML <ClamAV-users@lists.clamav.net<mailto:ClamAV-users@lists.clamav.net>>; clamav-announce@lists.clamav.net<mailto:clamav-announce@lists.clamav.net>
Cc: Joel Esler (jesler) <jesler@cisco.com<mailto:jesler@cisco.com>>
Subject: [clamav-users] ClamAV? blog: ClamAV 0.104.0 Second Release Candidate is here!


https://blog.clamav.net/2021/08/clamav-01040-second-release-candidate.html<https://blog.clamav.net/2021/08/clamav-01040-second-release-candidate.html?m=1>
ClamAV 0.104.0 Second Release Candidate is here!

Today we are publishing a second release candidate for 0.104.0. Please help us verify that 0.104.0-rc2 works on your systems and that we have resolved the concerns you reported with the first release candidate. We need your feedback, so let us know what you find and join us on the ClamAV mailing list<https://lists.clamav.net/mailman/listinfo/clamav-users>, or on our Discord<https://discord.gg/sGaxA5Q>.

In particular, we'd love your feedback on the new Debian and RPM packages (see below) and on the install documentation on docs.clamav.net<https://docs.clamav.net/manual/Installing.html>.

For details about what is new in the 0.104 feature release, please refer to the announcement for the first release candidate<https://blog.clamav.net/2021/07/clamav-01040-release-candidate-is-here.html>.

What changed since the first release candidate

First and foremost, we are listening to your concerns about the build system change from Autotools to CMake, and about changes coming in a future feature release when we add the Rust programming language toolchain into our build requirements. We can't bring back Autotools, but we hope that the following will help.

1. We are introducing a Long Term Support (LTS) program that will begin with the 0.103 feature release. Users will be required to stay up to date with the latest patch versions (e.g., 0.103.3) within the 0.103 feature series, but will have the peace-of-mind that the 0.103 feature release will receive critical patch versions with a stable ABI up until End-of-Life in September 2023. Stay tuned for a separate blog post introducing the full details of our LTS program. We will also add a version-support-matrix to our online documentation in tandem with the LTS blog post for easy reference.
2. We plan to increase our feature release cadence to make it easier to plan and to get new features and efficacy improvements into your hands faster. So, to make it easier for you to stay up-to-date with the latest stable release, we are introducing new package installers for macOS and for RPM-based and Debian-based Linux distributions. These new packages will be available for download on the clamav.net Downloads page<https://www.clamav.net/downloads>. You can find installation instructions for these packages in our online documentation<https://docs.clamav.net/manual/Installing.html#installing-with-an-installer>. Please note that the Linux packages unfortunately do not include clamav-milter at this time, and that we are still working on the signing & notarization process for the macOS installer, so it may not work for users on the latest macOS version.

In addition to the above, we've resolved the following issues identified during the first release candidate:

* Increased the functionality level (FLEVEL) for the 0.104 release to make space for additional 0.103 (LTS) patch versions. See the Version & FLEVEL reference<https://docs.clamav.net/appendix/FunctionalityLevels.html>.
* Improvements installation instructions in INSTALL.md and in the online documentation<https://docs.clamav.net/Introduction.html>.
* Fixed iconv / libiconv detection in the CMake configuration process when -Werror=return-type is enabled, such as in the openSUSE packaging environment. See PR-233<https://github.com/Cisco-Talos/clamav/pull/233>.
* Fixed broken CMake build when RAR support is intentionally disabled and test-support is enabled. See PR-237<https://github.com/Cisco-Talos/clamav/pull/237>.
* Fixed broken CMake build on systems that do not provide format string macros for standard integer types. See PR-231<https://github.com/Cisco-Talos/clamav/pull/231>.
* Improved long file path support on Windows. (Disclaimer: presently requires user to opt-in with a registry key change). See PR-229<https://github.com/Cisco-Talos/clamav/pull/229>.
* Fixed a segfault and socket file descriptor leak in ClamOnAcc. See PR-227<https://github.com/Cisco-Talos/clamav/pull/227>.
* Fixed an error reported by ClamD when scanning directories on Windows. See PR-230<https://github.com/Cisco-Talos/clamav/pull/230>.
* Fixed issue with Freshclam support for Universal Naming Convention (UNC) paths on Windows. See PR-226<https://github.com/Cisco-Talos/clamav/pull/226>.
* Added missing environment variable feature documentation to the manpages. See PR-254<https://github.com/Cisco-Talos/clamav/pull/254>.
* Fixed an assortment of issues identified by Coverity static analysis. See PR-221<https://github.com/Cisco-Talos/clamav/pull/221>.
* Tuned the Valgrind suppression rules for the public test suite to resolve a false positive that caused intermittent ClamD test failures. See PR-238<https://github.com/Cisco-Talos/clamav/pull/238>.
* Fixed the mspack library name to deconflict with system installed mspack packages. See PR-234<https://github.com/Cisco-Talos/clamav/pull/234>.
* Fixed a false positive in the ClamD tests, reported by Valgrind when compiling with Clang. See PR-236<https://github.com/Cisco-Talos/clamav/pull/236>.

Special thanks to Arjen de Korte and Mark Fortescue for contributing patches to fix some of the above issues. And thank you to so many of you who chimed in on the mailing lists, on Discord, and on GitHub Issues to identify issues and share your experiences with the first release candidate.
Re: [clamav-users] ClamAV? blog: ClamAV 0.104.0 Second Release Candidate is here! [ In reply to ]
Hi there,

On Sun, 22 Aug 2021, Mark Pizzolato via clamav-users wrote:

> ... Previous portable zip files included a README.md, a NEWS.md and
> UserManual.html (in addition to what?s in the now html directory
> which previously was called UserManual).
>
> I never worried about what?s in these files or directories ...

:):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):)

--

73,
Ged.

_______________________________________________

clamav-users mailing list
clamav-users@lists.clamav.net
https://lists.clamav.net/mailman/listinfo/clamav-users


Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide:
https://github.com/vrtadmin/clamav-faq

http://www.clamav.net/contact.html#ml
Re: [clamav-users] ClamAV® blog: ClamAV 0.104.0 Second Release Candidate is here! [ In reply to ]
I’m a fan of the thought of removing the user manual completely from the downloaded packages and including a link to docs.ClamAV.net. Since that’s more dynamic.


Sent from my ? iPhone

> On Aug 22, 2021, at 04:22, G.W. Haywood via clamav-users <clamav-users@lists.clamav.net> wrote:
>
> ?Hi there,
>
>> On Sun, 22 Aug 2021, Mark Pizzolato via clamav-users wrote:
>>
>> ... Previous portable zip files included a README.md, a NEWS.md and
>> UserManual.html (in addition to what’s in the now html directory
>> which previously was called UserManual).
>> I never worried about what’s in these files or directories ...
>
> :):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):)
>
> --
>
> 73,
> Ged.
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> clamav-users mailing list
> clamav-users@lists.clamav.net
> https://lists.clamav.net/mailman/listinfo/clamav-users
>
>
> Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide:
> https://github.com/vrtadmin/clamav-faq
>
> http://www.clamav.net/contact.html#ml

_______________________________________________

clamav-users mailing list
clamav-users@lists.clamav.net
https://lists.clamav.net/mailman/listinfo/clamav-users


Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide:
https://github.com/vrtadmin/clamav-faq

http://www.clamav.net/contact.html#ml
Re: [clamav-users] ClamAV? blog: ClamAV 0.104.0 Second Release Candidate is here! [ In reply to ]
Hi there,

On Sun, 22 Aug 2021, Joel Esler (jesler) via clamav-users wrote:

> I’m a fan of the thought of removing the user manual completely from
> the downloaded packages and including a link to docs.ClamAV.net.
> Since that’s more dynamic.

But not so easy to pipe through 'grep'.

--

73,
Ged.

_______________________________________________

clamav-users mailing list
clamav-users@lists.clamav.net
https://lists.clamav.net/mailman/listinfo/clamav-users


Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide:
https://github.com/vrtadmin/clamav-faq

http://www.clamav.net/contact.html#ml
Re: [clamav-users] ClamAV® blog: ClamAV 0.104.0 Second Release Candidate is here! [ In reply to ]
Citeren "G.W. Haywood via clamav-users" <clamav-users@lists.clamav.net>:

> Hi there,
>
> On Sun, 22 Aug 2021, Joel Esler (jesler) via clamav-users wrote:
>
>> I’m a fan of the thought of removing the user manual completely from
>> the downloaded packages and including a link to docs.ClamAV.net.
>> Since that’s more dynamic.
>
> But not so easy to pipe through 'grep'.

There is a search button on the website...




_______________________________________________

clamav-users mailing list
clamav-users@lists.clamav.net
https://lists.clamav.net/mailman/listinfo/clamav-users


Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide:
https://github.com/vrtadmin/clamav-faq

http://www.clamav.net/contact.html#ml
Re: [clamav-users] ClamAV® blog: ClamAV 0.104.0 Second Release Candidate is here! [ In reply to ]
Citeren "Joel Esler (jesler) via clamav-users"
<clamav-users@lists.clamav.net>:

> I’m a fan of the thought of removing the user manual completely from
> the downloaded packages and including a link to docs.ClamAV.net.
> Since that’s more dynamic.

I wouldn't be too heartbroken if that happened. For the 0.104.0
release, we will package the HTML documentation in a separate
subpackage anyway.


_______________________________________________

clamav-users mailing list
clamav-users@lists.clamav.net
https://lists.clamav.net/mailman/listinfo/clamav-users


Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide:
https://github.com/vrtadmin/clamav-faq

http://www.clamav.net/contact.html#ml
Re: [clamav-users] ClamAV® blog: ClamAV 0.104.0 Second Release Candidate is here! [ In reply to ]
Citeren "Micah Snyder (micasnyd)" <micasnyd@cisco.com>:

> I've run into this issue with the fixed port # on our test systems
> occasionally as well. I think I can identify an open port in the
> python code to make it more reliable, but haven't have time to try it.

I'm not sure if it is worth the effort. It seems to happen infrequent
enough not to be a serious problem. The openSUSE buikd service will
retry building after failures automatically anyway, so this is
certainly not a blocking issue for me.


_______________________________________________

clamav-users mailing list
clamav-users@lists.clamav.net
https://lists.clamav.net/mailman/listinfo/clamav-users


Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide:
https://github.com/vrtadmin/clamav-faq

http://www.clamav.net/contact.html#ml
Re: [clamav-users] ClamAV® blog: ClamAV 0.104.0 Second Release Candidate is here! [ In reply to ]
I could work about the .00000001% or the time that github is inaccessible in a given time, or I could save maintaining the docs in two places.


Sent from my ? iPhone

> On Aug 22, 2021, at 10:55, G.W. Haywood via clamav-users <clamav-users@lists.clamav.net> wrote:
>
> ?Hi there,
>
>> On Sun, 22 Aug 2021, Arjen de Korte via clamav-users wrote:
>> Citeren "G.W. Haywood via clamav-users" <clamav-users@lists.clamav.net>:
>>> On Sun, 22 Aug 2021, Joel Esler (jesler) via clamav-users wrote:
>>>> I’m a fan of the thought of removing the user manual completely from
>>>> the downloaded packages and including a link to docs.ClamAV.net.
>>>> Since that’s more dynamic.
>>> But not so easy to pipe through 'grep'.
>>
>> There is a search button on the website...
>
> And if the site is inaccessible?
>
> --
>
> 73,
> Ged.
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> clamav-users mailing list
> clamav-users@lists.clamav.net
> https://lists.clamav.net/mailman/listinfo/clamav-users
>
>
> Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide:
> https://github.com/vrtadmin/clamav-faq
>
> http://www.clamav.net/contact.html#ml

_______________________________________________

clamav-users mailing list
clamav-users@lists.clamav.net
https://lists.clamav.net/mailman/listinfo/clamav-users


Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide:
https://github.com/vrtadmin/clamav-faq

http://www.clamav.net/contact.html#ml
Re: [clamav-users] ClamAV® blog: ClamAV 0.104.0 Second Release Candidate is here! [ In reply to ]
I could worry about the .00000001% of the time*


Sent from my ? iPhone

> On Aug 22, 2021, at 13:48, Joel Esler (jesler) <jesler@cisco.com> wrote:
>
> ?I could work about the .00000001% or the time that github is inaccessible in a given time, or I could save maintaining the docs in two places.
>
> —
> Sent from my ? iPhone
>
>> On Aug 22, 2021, at 10:55, G.W. Haywood via clamav-users <clamav-users@lists.clamav.net> wrote:
>>
>> ?Hi there,
>>
>>>> On Sun, 22 Aug 2021, Arjen de Korte via clamav-users wrote:
>>> Citeren "G.W. Haywood via clamav-users" <clamav-users@lists.clamav.net>:
>>>> On Sun, 22 Aug 2021, Joel Esler (jesler) via clamav-users wrote:
>>>>> I’m a fan of the thought of removing the user manual completely from
>>>>> the downloaded packages and including a link to docs.ClamAV.net.
>>>>> Since that’s more dynamic.
>>>> But not so easy to pipe through 'grep'.
>>>
>>> There is a search button on the website...
>>
>> And if the site is inaccessible?
>>
>> --
>>
>> 73,
>> Ged.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>>
>> clamav-users mailing list
>> clamav-users@lists.clamav.net
>> https://lists.clamav.net/mailman/listinfo/clamav-users
>>
>>
>> Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide:
>> https://github.com/vrtadmin/clamav-faq
>>
>> http://www.clamav.net/contact.html#ml

_______________________________________________

clamav-users mailing list
clamav-users@lists.clamav.net
https://lists.clamav.net/mailman/listinfo/clamav-users


Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide:
https://github.com/vrtadmin/clamav-faq

http://www.clamav.net/contact.html#ml
Re: [clamav-users] ClamAV? blog: ClamAV 0.104.0 Second Release Candidate is here! [ In reply to ]
Hi there,

On Sun, 22 Aug 2021, Joel Esler (jesler) via clamav-users wrote:
>> On Aug 22, 2021, at 10:55, G.W. Haywood via clamav-users <clamav-users@lists.clamav.net> wrote:
>>> On Sun, 22 Aug 2021, Arjen de Korte via clamav-users wrote:
>>> Citeren "G.W. Haywood via clamav-users" <clamav-users@lists.clamav.net>:
>>>> On Sun, 22 Aug 2021, Joel Esler (jesler) via clamav-users wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> I’m a fan of the thought of removing the user manual completely from
>>>>> the downloaded packages and including a link to docs.ClamAV.net.
>>>>> Since that’s more dynamic.
>>>>
>>>> But not so easy to pipe through 'grep'.
>>>
>>> There is a search button on the website...
>>
>> And if the site is inaccessible?
>
> I could worry about the .00000001% of the time that github is inaccessible ...

Good job you're not a coder. What about when the Internet connection
at the client's end is down? Here, in the English midlands, the heart
of British industry, that's like five times a day for anywhere between
ten minutes and half an hour.

--

73,
Ged.

_______________________________________________

clamav-users mailing list
clamav-users@lists.clamav.net
https://lists.clamav.net/mailman/listinfo/clamav-users


Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide:
https://github.com/vrtadmin/clamav-faq

http://www.clamav.net/contact.html#ml
Re: [clamav-users] ClamAV® blog: ClamAV 0.104.0 Second Release Candidate is here! [ In reply to ]
On Sunday, August 22, 2021 at 11:48 AM, G.W. Haywood via clamav-users wrote:
> On Sun, 22 Aug 2021, Joel Esler (jesler) via clamav-users wrote:
> >> On Aug 22, 2021, at 10:55, G.W. Haywood via clamav-users <clamav-
> users@lists.clamav.net> wrote:
> >>> On Sun, 22 Aug 2021, Arjen de Korte via clamav-users wrote:
> >>> Citeren "G.W. Haywood via clamav-users" <clamav-
> users@lists.clamav.net>:
> >>>> On Sun, 22 Aug 2021, Joel Esler (jesler) via clamav-users wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I’m a fan of the thought of removing the user manual completely
> >>>>> from the downloaded packages and including a link to
> docs.ClamAV.net.
> >>>>> Since that’s more dynamic.
> >>>>
> >>>> But not so easy to pipe through 'grep'.
> >>>
> >>> There is a search button on the website...
> >>
> >> And if the site is inaccessible?
> >
> > I could worry about the .00000001% of the time that github is inaccessible ...
>
> Good job you're not a coder. What about when the Internet connection at
> the client's end is down? Here, in the English midlands, the heart of British
> industry, that's like five times a day for anywhere between ten minutes and
> half an hour.

It seems to me that these zip or other specifically prebuilt packages on the
ClamAV website's download pages serve the needs of those folks doing a
manual version update. In general, this means that you're merely replacing
the useful binary files and hardly ever changing the configuration of either
clamd or freshclam.

Someone doing an initial installation has various other things to think about
relating to configuration setup which MAY find total documentation
useful. The web site serves that purpose very well. Meanwhile, the
conf_examples directory contains a very useful starting point for anyone who
may actually start from that container (zip or otherwise) if they're actually
doing an initial install and configuration without the benefit of immediate
proximate Internet access.

- Mark Pizzolato

_______________________________________________

clamav-users mailing list
clamav-users@lists.clamav.net
https://lists.clamav.net/mailman/listinfo/clamav-users


Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide:
https://github.com/vrtadmin/clamav-faq

http://www.clamav.net/contact.html#ml
Re: [clamav-users] ClamAV® blog: ClamAV 0.104.0 Second Release Candidate is here! [ In reply to ]
On Sun, 22 Aug 2021 14:42:06 +0000
"Joel Esler \(jesler\) via clamav-users" <clamav-users@lists.clamav.net> wrote:

> I’m a fan of the thought of removing the user manual completely from the downloaded packages and including a link to docs.ClamAV.net. Since that’s more dynamic.


I think that's a bad idea for three reasons:

First, the Website might be (temporarily) inaccessible.

Second, the machine running ClamAV may be blocked from accessing the Internet in general. E.g., our mail server runs ClamAV, but is explicitly blocked from general outbound Internet access by IPtables (except for the few anycast IP addresses needed for DB updates). It's an application of the "principle of least privilege".

Finally, if the documentation is "dynamic", it presumably is for the latest release, probably the latest "official" release. If that is the case, how can somebody use those docs to diagnose a problem with a slightly older release that's still supposed to be usable? Aren't most problems due to misunderstanding, bad configuration or other user caused issues that won't be solved by simply upgrading? In other words, aren't the docs really specific to a particular release? (This is especially important for beta releases like 0.104.)

_______________________________________________

clamav-users mailing list
clamav-users@lists.clamav.net
https://lists.clamav.net/mailman/listinfo/clamav-users


Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide:
https://github.com/vrtadmin/clamav-faq

http://www.clamav.net/contact.html#ml
Re: [clamav-users] ClamAV? blog: ClamAV 0.104.0 Second Release Candidate is here! [ In reply to ]
Hi there,

On Mon, 23 Aug 2021, Paul Kosinski via clamav-users wrote:

> On Sun, 22 Aug 2021 14:42:06 +0000
> "Joel Esler via clamav-users" wrote:
>
>> I’m a fan of the thought of removing the user manual completely
>> from the downloaded packages and including a link to
>> docs.ClamAV.net. Since that’s more dynamic.
>
> I think that's a bad idea for three reasons:
>
> First, the Website might be (temporarily) inaccessible.
>
> Second, the machine running ClamAV may be blocked from accessing the Internet ...
>
> Finally, if the documentation is "dynamic", it presumably is for the latest release ...

+1

I suspect most ClamAV installations are via packages for the various
distributions. Please think about the distribution package managers.
If the documentation were not included in the release tarballs they'd
have a great deal more work to do, and the opportunities for errors
and confusion would be increased out of all proportion.

--

73,
Ged.

_______________________________________________

clamav-users mailing list
clamav-users@lists.clamav.net
https://lists.clamav.net/mailman/listinfo/clamav-users


Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide:
https://github.com/vrtadmin/clamav-faq

http://www.clamav.net/contact.html#ml
Re: [clamav-users] ClamAV® blog: ClamAV 0.104.0 Second Release Candidate is here! [ In reply to ]
On Tue, 24 Aug 2021 10:48:48 +0100 (BST)
"G.W. Haywood via clamav-users" <clamav-users@lists.clamav.net> wrote:

> Hi there,
>
> On Mon, 23 Aug 2021, Paul Kosinski via clamav-users wrote:
>
> > On Sun, 22 Aug 2021 14:42:06 +0000
> > "Joel Esler via clamav-users" wrote:
> >
> >> I’m a fan of the thought of removing the user manual completely
> >> from the downloaded packages and including a link to
> >> docs.ClamAV.net. Since that’s more dynamic.
> >
> > I think that's a bad idea for three reasons:
> >
> > First, the Website might be (temporarily) inaccessible.
> >
> > Second, the machine running ClamAV may be blocked from accessing the Internet ...
> >
> > Finally, if the documentation is "dynamic", it presumably is for the latest release ...
>
> +1
>
> I suspect most ClamAV installations are via packages for the various
> distributions. Please think about the distribution package managers.
> If the documentation were not included in the release tarballs they'd
> have a great deal more work to do, and the opportunities for errors
> and confusion would be increased out of all proportion.


Good point about the Release Managers.

Maybe the GPL should augmented to require docs to be available in the same way as the source code, when GPLed executables are distributed :-)


_______________________________________________

clamav-users mailing list
clamav-users@lists.clamav.net
https://lists.clamav.net/mailman/listinfo/clamav-users


Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide:
https://github.com/vrtadmin/clamav-faq

http://www.clamav.net/contact.html#ml
Re: [clamav-users] ClamAV? blog: ClamAV 0.104.0 Second Release Candidate is here! [ In reply to ]
This conversation is a fun read! But don't worry really no point removing the docs from the source package or the pre-compiled packages. Including it is painless at this point. If you're curious why, here's the process...

The documentation website source is hosted in our Cisco-Talos/clamav-documentation<https://github.com/Cisco-Talos/clamav-documentation> repo.

Any time there is a change to the docs, GitHub Actions automatically re-builds the static site using mdBook and force-pushes it to the gh-pages<https://github.com/Cisco-Talos/clamav-documentation/tree/gh-pages> branch to publish it.

To include the docs in the source tarball, all we do (Jenkins does) is copy the contents of that branch into the clamav/docs/html<https://github.com/Cisco-Talos/clamav/tree/main/docs/html> directory before building the source package.

From there, the build system takes care of it. The docs/html directory is bundled into the tarball, and when building the pre-compiled packages, the html directory is marked for installation and so is included in each package.

That also means that if you're not building from the release tarball (i.e. if you're building from a git clone), you won't get an offline copy of the documentation.

-Micah

Micah Snyder
ClamAV Development
Talos
Cisco Systems, Inc.
________________________________
From: clamav-users <clamav-users-bounces@lists.clamav.net> on behalf of Paul Kosinski via clamav-users <clamav-users@lists.clamav.net>
Sent: Tuesday, August 24, 2021 1:22 PM
To: clamav-users@lists.clamav.net <clamav-users@lists.clamav.net>
Cc: Paul Kosinski <clamav-users@iment.com>
Subject: Re: [clamav-users] ClamAV? blog: ClamAV 0.104.0 Second Release Candidate is here!

On Tue, 24 Aug 2021 10:48:48 +0100 (BST)
"G.W. Haywood via clamav-users" <clamav-users@lists.clamav.net> wrote:

> Hi there,
>
> On Mon, 23 Aug 2021, Paul Kosinski via clamav-users wrote:
>
> > On Sun, 22 Aug 2021 14:42:06 +0000
> > "Joel Esler via clamav-users" wrote:
> >
> >> I?m a fan of the thought of removing the user manual completely
> >> from the downloaded packages and including a link to
> >> docs.ClamAV.net. Since that?s more dynamic.
> >
> > I think that's a bad idea for three reasons:
> >
> > First, the Website might be (temporarily) inaccessible.
> >
> > Second, the machine running ClamAV may be blocked from accessing the Internet ...
> >
> > Finally, if the documentation is "dynamic", it presumably is for the latest release ...
>
> +1
>
> I suspect most ClamAV installations are via packages for the various
> distributions. Please think about the distribution package managers.
> If the documentation were not included in the release tarballs they'd
> have a great deal more work to do, and the opportunities for errors
> and confusion would be increased out of all proportion.


Good point about the Release Managers.

Maybe the GPL should augmented to require docs to be available in the same way as the source code, when GPLed executables are distributed :-)


_______________________________________________

clamav-users mailing list
clamav-users@lists.clamav.net
https://lists.clamav.net/mailman/listinfo/clamav-users


Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide:
https://github.com/vrtadmin/clamav-faq

http://www.clamav.net/contact.html#ml
Re: [clamav-users] ClamAV? blog: ClamAV 0.104.0 Second Release Candidate is here! [ In reply to ]
Hi Mark,

Thanks for the feedback on the Windows packages!

We should probably include the README.md and NEWS.md files. Whoops. Thanks for highlighting the discrepancy.

Regarding being down to 30 exe/dll files from 71 -- we used to bundle in a copy of the VC redistributable DLLs somewhat manually, which meant we went a little overkill, bringing in some that we didn't use. Now CMake's CPack tool brings in the redistributables for us, and clearly do a better job, heh. We could probably shrink that number down even more if we wanted to statically compile the other library dependencies like libxml2, openssl, etc. But I think it's probably good how it is.

You pointed out that there are a few extra .lib files (e.g. freshclam.lib, clamav.lib, etc). Those are required if you want to compile another project to link with libclamav.dll or libfreshclam.dll, and using the headers also now installed in the 'include' directory. On windows to link with a DLL you must link with the .lib. It's... strange. And if a static library is built, that also shows as a .lib file and is often named differently, like 'clamav_static.lib'. I don't really expect anyone to do that on Windows, but I suppose can if they want. I don't really see any point removing them or the 'include' directory.

Regarding 'UserManual.html' and the 'UserManual' directory being moved to 'html/index.html': I wish I could make it look more how it used to. I think it's less friendly to have an 'html' directory and require users to spot the 'index.html' file. I think we could probably rename the directory from 'html' back to 'UserManual' easily enough, but I don't think we can easily rename and move 'index.html' as easily. And you're right, most people won't really care. The web is generally accessible. And if you are offline, it's not too tough to figure out.

Thanks again for your feedback on the RC2! Do please reach out if there's anything else you run into.

-Micah


Micah Snyder
ClamAV Development
Talos
Cisco Systems, Inc.
________________________________
From: clamav-users <clamav-users-bounces@lists.clamav.net> on behalf of Mark Pizzolato - Clamav-Win32 via clamav-users <clamav-users@lists.clamav.net>
Sent: Saturday, August 21, 2021 10:26 PM
To: ClamAV users ML <clamav-users@lists.clamav.net>; clamav-announce@lists.clamav.net <clamav-announce@lists.clamav.net>
Cc: Mark Pizzolato - Clamav-Win32 <clamav-win32@subscriptions.pizzolato.net>
Subject: Re: [clamav-users] ClamAV? blog: ClamAV 0.104.0 Second Release Candidate is here!


While testing what?s in the x64 windows portable zip file (clamav-0.104.0-rc2.win.x64.zip), I make the following observations:



1) Total executables and dlls goes down from 71 previously to 30 in 0.104.0 ? This is likely a good sign.

2) The zip file includes 5 lib files which serve no purpose and probably should be removed. Hmm I was going to say the same thing about the provided include directory, but then maybe both could be useful for locally built and linked programs. I?m not testing anything like this? None of these files were in the portable packages for prior versions.

3) Previous portable zip files included a README.md, a NEWS.md and UserManual.html (in addition to what?s in the now html directory which previously was called UserManual). I never worried about what?s in these files or directories, but now they?re very different.

4) Otherwise, freshclam and clamd operate normally in my environment and are now in production. If anything surprising happens, I?ll raise the problem here.



* Mark Pizzolato



From: clamav-users <clamav-users-bounces@lists.clamav.net<mailto:clamav-users-bounces@lists.clamav.net>> On Behalf Of Joel Esler (jesler) via clamav-users
Sent: Thursday, August 19, 2021 1:41 PM
To: ClamAV users ML <ClamAV-users@lists.clamav.net<mailto:ClamAV-users@lists.clamav.net>>; clamav-announce@lists.clamav.net<mailto:clamav-announce@lists.clamav.net>
Cc: Joel Esler (jesler) <jesler@cisco.com<mailto:jesler@cisco.com>>
Subject: [clamav-users] ClamAV? blog: ClamAV 0.104.0 Second Release Candidate is here!



https://blog.clamav.net/2021/08/clamav-01040-second-release-candidate.html<https://blog.clamav.net/2021/08/clamav-01040-second-release-candidate.html?m=1>

ClamAV 0.104.0 Second Release Candidate is here!

Today we are publishing a second release candidate for 0.104.0. Please help us verify that 0.104.0-rc2 works on your systems and that we have resolved the concerns you reported with the first release candidate. We need your feedback, so let us know what you find and join us on the ClamAV mailing list<https://lists.clamav.net/mailman/listinfo/clamav-users>, or on our Discord<https://discord.gg/sGaxA5Q>.

In particular, we'd love your feedback on the new Debian and RPM packages (see below) and on the install documentation on docs.clamav.net<https://docs.clamav.net/manual/Installing.html>.

For details about what is new in the 0.104 feature release, please refer to the announcement for the first release candidate<https://blog.clamav.net/2021/07/clamav-01040-release-candidate-is-here.html>.



What changed since the first release candidate

First and foremost, we are listening to your concerns about the build system change from Autotools to CMake, and about changes coming in a future feature release when we add the Rust programming language toolchain into our build requirements. We can't bring back Autotools, but we hope that the following will help.

1. We are introducing a Long Term Support (LTS) program that will begin with the 0.103 feature release. Users will be required to stay up to date with the latest patch versions (e.g., 0.103.3) within the 0.103 feature series, but will have the peace-of-mind that the 0.103 feature release will receive critical patch versions with a stable ABI up until End-of-Life in September 2023. Stay tuned for a separate blog post introducing the full details of our LTS program. We will also add a version-support-matrix to our online documentation in tandem with the LTS blog post for easy reference.
2. We plan to increase our feature release cadence to make it easier to plan and to get new features and efficacy improvements into your hands faster. So, to make it easier for you to stay up-to-date with the latest stable release, we are introducing new package installers for macOS and for RPM-based and Debian-based Linux distributions. These new packages will be available for download on the clamav.net Downloads page<https://www.clamav.net/downloads>. You can find installation instructions for these packages in our online documentation<https://docs.clamav.net/manual/Installing.html#installing-with-an-installer>. Please note that the Linux packages unfortunately do not include clamav-milter at this time, and that we are still working on the signing & notarization process for the macOS installer, so it may not work for users on the latest macOS version.

In addition to the above, we've resolved the following issues identified during the first release candidate:

* Increased the functionality level (FLEVEL) for the 0.104 release to make space for additional 0.103 (LTS) patch versions. See the Version & FLEVEL reference<https://docs.clamav.net/appendix/FunctionalityLevels.html>.
* Improvements installation instructions in INSTALL.md and in the online documentation<https://docs.clamav.net/Introduction.html>.
* Fixed iconv / libiconv detection in the CMake configuration process when -Werror=return-type is enabled, such as in the openSUSE packaging environment. See PR-233<https://github.com/Cisco-Talos/clamav/pull/233>.
* Fixed broken CMake build when RAR support is intentionally disabled and test-support is enabled. See PR-237<https://github.com/Cisco-Talos/clamav/pull/237>.
* Fixed broken CMake build on systems that do not provide format string macros for standard integer types. See PR-231<https://github.com/Cisco-Talos/clamav/pull/231>.
* Improved long file path support on Windows. (Disclaimer: presently requires user to opt-in with a registry key change). See PR-229<https://github.com/Cisco-Talos/clamav/pull/229>.
* Fixed a segfault and socket file descriptor leak in ClamOnAcc. See PR-227<https://github.com/Cisco-Talos/clamav/pull/227>.
* Fixed an error reported by ClamD when scanning directories on Windows. See PR-230<https://github.com/Cisco-Talos/clamav/pull/230>.
* Fixed issue with Freshclam support for Universal Naming Convention (UNC) paths on Windows. See PR-226<https://github.com/Cisco-Talos/clamav/pull/226>.
* Added missing environment variable feature documentation to the manpages. See PR-254<https://github.com/Cisco-Talos/clamav/pull/254>.
* Fixed an assortment of issues identified by Coverity static analysis. See PR-221<https://github.com/Cisco-Talos/clamav/pull/221>.
* Tuned the Valgrind suppression rules for the public test suite to resolve a false positive that caused intermittent ClamD test failures. See PR-238<https://github.com/Cisco-Talos/clamav/pull/238>.
* Fixed the mspack library name to deconflict with system installed mspack packages. See PR-234<https://github.com/Cisco-Talos/clamav/pull/234>.
* Fixed a false positive in the ClamD tests, reported by Valgrind when compiling with Clang. See PR-236<https://github.com/Cisco-Talos/clamav/pull/236>.

Special thanks to Arjen de Korte and Mark Fortescue for contributing patches to fix some of the above issues. And thank you to so many of you who chimed in on the mailing lists, on Discord, and on GitHub Issues to identify issues and share your experiences with the first release candidate.
Re: [clamav-users] ClamAV® blog: ClamAV 0.104.0 Second Release Candidate is here! [ In reply to ]
On Tue, 24 Aug 2021 23:08:52 +0000
"Micah Snyder (micasnyd)" <micasnyd@cisco.com> wrote:

> This conversation is a fun read! But don't worry really no point removing the docs from the source package or the pre-compiled packages. Including it is painless at this point. If you're curious why, here's the process...
>
> The documentation website source is hosted in our Cisco-Talos/clamav-documentation<https://github.com/Cisco-Talos/clamav-documentation> repo.
>
> Any time there is a change to the docs, GitHub Actions automatically re-builds the static site using mdBook and force-pushes it to the gh-pages<https://github.com/Cisco-Talos/clamav-documentation/tree/gh-pages> branch to publish it.
>
> To include the docs in the source tarball, all we do (Jenkins does) is copy the contents of that branch into the clamav/docs/html<https://github.com/Cisco-Talos/clamav/tree/main/docs/html> directory before building the source package.
>
> >From there, the build system takes care of it. The docs/html directory is bundled into the tarball, and when building the pre-compiled packages, the html directory is marked for installation and so is included in each package.
>
> That also means that if you're not building from the release tarball (i.e. if you're building from a git clone), you won't get an offline copy of the documentation.
>
> -Micah
>
> Micah Snyder
> ClamAV Development
> Talos
> Cisco Systems, Inc.


Sounds good!

_______________________________________________

clamav-users mailing list
clamav-users@lists.clamav.net
https://lists.clamav.net/mailman/listinfo/clamav-users


Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide:
https://github.com/vrtadmin/clamav-faq

http://www.clamav.net/contact.html#ml