From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Mar 22 10:06:10 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D6F8216A420 for ; Wed, 22 Mar 2006 10:06:10 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bsd@1command.com) Received: from mail.1command.com (mail.1command.com [216.177.243.35]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3E30F43D45 for ; Wed, 22 Mar 2006 10:06:08 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from bsd@1command.com) Received: from mail.1command.com (localhost.1command.com [127.0.0.1]) by mail.1command.com (8.13.3/8.13.3) with ESMTP id k2MA66eL003730 for ; Wed, 22 Mar 2006 02:06:06 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from bsd@1command.com) Received: (from www@localhost) by mail.1command.com (8.13.3/8.13.3/Submit) id k2MA66DG003729 for freebsd-ports@freebsd.org; Wed, 22 Mar 2006 02:06:06 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from bsd@1command.com) X-Authentication-Warning: mail.1command.com: www set sender to bsd@1command.com using -f Received: from mail.1command.com (mail.1command.com [216.177.243.35]) by webmail.1command.com (H.R. Communications Messaging System) with HTTP; Wed, 22 Mar 2006 02:06:05 -0800 Message-ID: <20060322020605.tocbj4eibk0k4kss@webmail.1command.com> X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2006 02:06:05 -0800 From: Chris To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org References: <20060321233021.59hsmdorkgckc0so@webmail.1command.com> <20060322103146.3c1f6997@it.buh.tecnik93.com> In-Reply-To: <20060322103146.3c1f6997@it.buh.tecnik93.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format="flowed" Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit User-Agent: H.R. Communications Internet Messaging System (HCIMS) H3 (4.0.4) / FreeBSD-5.5 Subject: Re: bdc BitDefender Console - problems, problems X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2006 10:06:10 -0000 Quoting Ion-Mihai Tetcu : > > [ cc'ing port maintainer, which is always a good idea ] Thank you, and thank you for your reply. > >> On Tue, 21 Mar 2006 23:30:21 -0800 > Chris wrote: > >> Hello, >> I built & installed bdc-7.0.1_1 from the ports on a 5.4 system. > > uname from your .sig is for that system ? Indeed. Intended to save me some time typing. :) > >> I have a couple of problems: >> After the build/ install I logged out/ logged in and performed >> bdc --update. As instructed by the banner displayed upon successful >> installation. After updating bdc. I performed bdc --info which returned: >> >> Error: core initialization failed: Libfn initialization failed >> >> Googling for this error returned a solution that someone on the >> freebsd-questions list provided back in June of 2005. Further >> indicationg that "work was underway to release a libfn.so file, which >> will be available in a future update." This was almost a year ago. >> I hate to sound like I'm whining, or ungreatful (which I'm not). But >> isn't this a long time to wait for something that is related to system >> security? Anyway, the cure is to build/ install misc/comapt4x. Which I >> did. > > Interesting. Adi, maybe the port should depend on compat4x until the > problem is fixed ? > >> I then rebooted after the install. Only to be greeted with an >> rc message indicating that compat4x was not completely/ correctly >> installed. I quickly discovered that I needed to enable it in rc.conf. >> OK, wouldn't it be prudent to place a banner at the end of the compat4x >> install; warning that an entry in rc is required to ENable compat4x? I >> enabled it in my kernconf already, as well as Linux emulation/ >> compatibility. >> Linux ABI. As well as Apache and many (most?) of the other ports >> that require >> rc support *do* inform the user after install of this need. I guess I'm >> just really suprised that something that *is* freebsd doesn't. Just thought >> it was worth mentioning. > > Look for the message telling you an rc.d file has been installed and if > you see it Yes. This is thr "banner" I was *expecting* to see when the port finished installing. So that I would know that it did/ did not need adding to rc. But it wasn't there. Nor anything close to resembling such a message. This is all of course if I understand you correctly. > you can be 98% sure you have to enable it via > rc.conf[.local] Eventually all ports start-up scripts will be converted > to rc.d and will have to be enable via rc.onf[.local] Understood. > >> One last problem; about bdc itself. I ran it against all the mailboxes >> after making it happy about the libfn problem. I used the following: >> >> bdc --arc --files --log --debug --mail --disinfect --move /var/mail >> >> which returned: >> >> BDC/FreeBSD 5.x-Console (v7.0-2545) (i386) (Dec 22 2004 19:56:57) >> Copyright (C) 1996-2004 SOFTWIN SRL. All rights reserved. >> >> /var/mail/infos=>(message 37)=>[S ... (CET)]=>(MIME part)=>q361598.exe >> infected: Win32.Swen.A@mm <- cevakrnl.xmd >> /var/mail/infos=>(message 37)=>[Subject: ... 6 +0100 (CET)]=>(MIME >> part)=>q361598.exe move failed <- cevakrnl.xmd >> >> It doesn't appear that all that work to get bdc installed and working >> was worth the time and trouble after all. Isn't it capable of disinfection >> yet? > > My policy has always been that infected mail should be deleted :) Agreed! Unfortunately it's in mbox format and will take a little ferriting to find/ cut/ delete. :( I'm used to the AV being capable of doing that. My *purchased* copy for (Win)NT server version of BitDefender *does* disinfect things quite effectively. Hence my choice of installs for FreeBSD. I would *dearly* hate to have to depend on some *lame* win boexn for mail services. >:( > >> It *does* know what it is; as indicated with the following: >> >> bdc --arc --files --log --debug --mail --disinfect /var/mail >> BDC/FreeBSD 5.x-Console (v7.0-2545) (i386) (Dec 22 2004 19:56:57) >> Copyright (C) 1996-2004 SOFTWIN SRL. All rights reserved. >> >> /var/mail/infos=>(message 37)=>[S ... (CET)]=>(MIME part)=>q361598.exe >> infected: Win32.Swen.A@mm <- cevakrnl.xmd >> /var/mail/infos=>(message 37)=>[Subject: M ... :16 +0100 (CET)]=>(MIME >> part)=>q361598.exe deleted <- cevakrnl.xmd >> /var/mail/infos=>(message 37)=>[Subject: Mic ... Feb 2006 21:29:16 >> +0100 (CET)]=>(MIME part) updated <- mime.xmd >> /var/mail/infos=>(message 37) updated <- mbox.xmd >> /var/mail/infos update failed >> >> So it *knows* what it is. But doesn't appear to be a mature enough >> ant-virus application to actually disinfect or protect a system yet. >> Is that true? > > Might be true for disinfection for some viruses, but not for all. As to > protection, I believe it does it job adequately: it detects the > viruses and the signatures are updated very quick. Agreed. But not _currently_ without (excessive?) administrative overhead. Thanks again for the reply. --Chris > > > -- > IOnut - Unregistered ;) FreeBSD "user" > "Intellectual Property" is nowhere near as valuable as "Intellect" > > BOFH excuse #369: > Virus transmitted from computer to sysadmins > > > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" > -- Microsoft: Disc space -- the final frontier! ----------------------------------------------------------------- FreeBSD 5.4-RELEASE-p12 (SMP - 900x2) Tue Mar 7 19:37:23 PST 2006 /////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////