Mail-ClamAv / ClamAv

Jeff A. Earickson jaearick at
Thu Dec 20 13:06:06 GMT 2007

On Wed, 19 Dec 2007, Richard Potter wrote:

> Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2007 23:10:12 -0500 (EST)
> From: Richard Potter <rpotter at>
> Reply-To: MailScanner discussion <mailscanner at>
> To: MailScanner discussion <mailscanner at>
> Subject: Re: Mail-ClamAv / ClamAv
> On Wed, December 19, 2007 8:02 am, shuttlebox wrote:
>> On Dec 19, 2007 1:51 PM, ajos1 at
>> <ajos1 at> wrote:
>>> Julian Field wrote:
>>>>> Due to problems with it building the clamavmodule virus scanner, I
>>> have backed off to the previous version again. Sorry about that.
>>> For those interested... I spent hours (and hours) last week trying to
>>> get Mail-ClamAv to install... and in the end I managed to work out it
>>> failed for the following reason...
>> This has happened every other release of Clam...that Mail::Clamav gets
>> out of sync. But now there's no reason to use it anymore when MS has
>> support for clamd. Same speed and less memory used.
> I have also come to this conclusion. Anyone have thoughts on this, right
> or wrong?

I've got to agree here...  Clamavmodule was always a PITA with the perl 
module being out of sync.  The only reason I used it was speed.  Clamd
has worked great since Julian introduced it to MailScanner.  My two
cents: offer clamd or the original clamav version for people who can't
get clamd to go, and yank the clamavmodule stuff outta there...

Jeff Earickson
Colby College

More information about the MailScanner mailing list