[Mimedefang] Problem running clamd but not clamscan

[Lucas Albers]

I am contemplating this, switching to clamd instead of clamscan.
when I ran clamdscan it pukes, so I will stay with what works, (for me)
I also heard reports that clamd pukes on bad archives.
My scan time is low enough with clamscan that I don't really see the point.
----------- SCAN SUMMARY -----------
Known viruses: 20583
Scanned directories: 1
Scanned files: 3
Infected files: 1
Data scanned: 0.11 Mb
I/O buffer size: 131072 bytes
Time: 0.995 sec (0 m 0 s)

Bryan Stansell said:
> the overhead of reading the virus defs each time clamscan runs is rather
> large (at least on my 'lil box).  here's a simple test i ran to show
> time differences between clamscan and clamd (5.039s vs 0.045s).
>
-- 
Luke Computer Science System Administrator