bdc replacement

Scott Silva ssilva at
Mon Apr 10 20:07:47 IST 2006

Glenn Steen spake the following on 4/10/2006 11:43 AM:
> On 10/04/06, Dhawal Doshy <dhawal at> wrote:
>> Hello List,
>> BDC has lately become a cpu hog (or maybe i discovered recently). Am
> Really? How bad is it? Could you perhaps describe your setup a bit,
> and perhaps some volume figures....?
>> wondering if there are any other alternatives in the command line virus
>> scanning world that are free (as in beer) OR relatively cheap and
>> consume much less resources.
>> I've been using clamav and uvscan for quite some time (qmail-scanner
>> days) and am more / less happy with their performance.. so any other
>> suggestions would be welcome.
>> Also a couple of questions for Julian:
>> 1. Shouldn't "LogFile=/tmp/log.bdc.$$" in bitdefender-wrapper point to
>> something like /var/spool/MailScanner/incoming/log.bdc.$$ and take
>> advantage of the tmpfs partition?
>> 2. Also i don't see any options being used in the bitdefender-wrapper
>> script (similar to ExtraOptions in clamav-wrapper). Any particular
>> reason why? Is it because MailScanner handles all the unpacking of
>> attachments?
>> thanks,
>> - dhawal
> Well, there are some that are free for private/home/non-commercial use
> .... like Antivir (or avira or whatever they like to be called....
>, AVG etc... (Avast is too, if you'd like to
> try your hand at writing a wrapper (I don't think it is included in
> the "supported set":-)). Panda isn't free, even though they say so,
> since you need to pay for updates, and besides.... It's not that well
> come together (although Ricks "new" wrapper makes it somewhat less of
> a hog), so I wouldn't recommend that one ... But it is cheap, one has
> to give it that... If one were a bit sarcastic, one might say it is
> cheap in every sense of the word;).
> If I'd look at anything new, it'd probably be ine if the four: AVG,
> Sophos, F-secure or F-prot.... with possibly nod32 as a remote
> outsider:-).
> Anyway, I've been happy with the same setup you've got (clam, bdc and
> mcafee), so would realy be interrested to hear what numbers you can
> present.
> Cheers
I run the same 3 and haven't seen any performance problems. Are you running
the gcc3x version, or do you still have the older (i think gcc29x) version?
The older one isn't even offered on their website, although I have them somewhere.


MailScanner is like deodorant...
You hope everybody uses it, and
you notice quickly if they don't!!!!

More information about the MailScanner mailing list