[Clamav-users] Problem with internal logger

Anthony Peacock a.peacock at chime.ucl.ac.uk
Fri Jun 2 16:50:48 IST 2006

Hi Kevin,

Kevin Miller wrote:
> Anthony Peacock wrote:
>> Hi Julian,
>> Julian Field wrote:
>>> On 1 Jun 2006, at 16:30, Kai Schaetzl wrote:
>>>> Julian Field wrote on Thu, 1 Jun 2006 14:04:52 +0100:
>>>>> My easy-to-install ClamAV+SA package configures freshclam.conf and
>>>>> spamd.conf for you, by commenting out the "Example" lines.
>>>> and then sets the mirror to US ?
>>> No, as I don't know what country you might be in. It just gets it
>>> working for you, saving new users a nasty catch which will confuse
>>> them entirely. Doing things like this annoys me, as they don't
>>> produce a nice error message telling the user what they need to do
>>> to alleviate the problem. It's a case of "Switch this option on to
>>> make anything work, default is off". I know I do it myself, but I do
>>> at least generate a polite error message which tells the user they
>>> need to set their company name in MailScanner.conf. 
>>> I am considering removing it from MailScanner.
>>> If the %org-name% has not been configured, then I just use the domain
>>> name by using Sys::Hostname::Long which is already needed by
>>> SpamAssassin so most people have it installed already. I replace the
>>> hostname with www to get the website address, and put the same in
>>> %org-long-name% as %org-name%.
>>> Does that sound rather better than the current "I'm not going to
>>> start" behaviour.
>> I wouldn't really be in favour of this.
>> A side-effect of the current behaviour is that it forces the person
>> installing the system to at least open and look at the config file
>> first. 
>> I don't think anyone should be installing something as important as
>> mailscanner without at least understanding what the default options
>> are doing.
> I think it's a good idea.  Only thing I'd do differently is to use the
> hostname instead of www + domain-name.  That would keep it shorter (I
> like concise), and the comments mention that periods sometimes hose the
> Symantic virus scanner or something to that effect.  Don't use Symantic
> so didn't pay too close attention.
> Maybe I'm just being grumpy, but I think anybody installing something
> like MailScanner w/o looking at the docs deserves what they get! <g>  

I guess I am sitting somewhere in the middle here...  :-)

I like the current behaviour because it forces the person installing the 
software to look into the config file before the software will even run.

I think the install script that Julian has created is great in that it 
removes most of the complications of getting a secure mail server up and 
running.  The downside (as I see it) is that it is possible for someone 
to get a secure mail server up and running without really understanding 
what is going on.  In my opinion that is dangerous.

I really am trying not to sound like a grumpy old man here, but I do 
feel that running an internet connected mail server is something that 
should be done by a person with a basic understanding of what is going on.

Anyway, I am not really arguing against Julian's suggestion as if you 
accept Julian's reason for maintaining the install script, this is the 
logical next step.

Hopefully most people who hit a problem get caught here or on the wiki 

Anthony Peacock
CHIME, Royal Free & University College Medical School
WWW:    http://www.chime.ucl.ac.uk/~rmhiajp/
"The problem with defending the purity of the English language is that
English is about as pure as a cribhouse whore. We don't just borrow
words; on occasion, English has pursued other languages down alleyways
to beat them unconscious and rifle their pockets for new
vocabulary."  -- James D. Nicoll

More information about the MailScanner mailing list