From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68]) by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2922C1FF146 for ; Tue, 09 Jun 2026 13:15:58 +0200 (CEST) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id C7F2EDB09; Tue, 9 Jun 2026 13:15:57 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: Date: Tue, 9 Jun 2026 13:15:52 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Beta Subject: Re: [PATCH pve-installer/pmg-api 0/2] ensure clamav-daemon is enabled To: Stoiko Ivanov References: <20260609100805.1631021-1-s.ivanov@proxmox.com> <20260609130949.44a52611@rosa.proxmox.com> Content-Language: en-US, de-DE From: Thomas Lamprecht In-Reply-To: <20260609130949.44a52611@rosa.proxmox.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Bm-Milter-Handled: 55990f41-d878-4baa-be0a-ee34c49e34d2 X-Bm-Transport-Timestamp: 1781003708434 X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.005 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% DMARC_MISSING 0.1 Missing DMARC policy KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record Message-ID-Hash: B3QFEZO3U2RCGI5AS6GHJXYSJXOD6MQM X-Message-ID-Hash: B3QFEZO3U2RCGI5AS6GHJXYSJXOD6MQM X-MailFrom: t.lamprecht@proxmox.com X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; loop; banned-address; emergency; member-moderation; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header CC: pmg-devel@lists.proxmox.com X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.10 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox Mail Gateway development discussion List-Help: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: On 09/06/2026 13:09, Stoiko Ivanov wrote: > On Tue, 9 Jun 2026 12:49:20 +0200 > Thomas Lamprecht wrote: > >> On 09/06/2026 12:07, Stoiko Ivanov wrote: >>> debian upstream's clamav packaging had some changes recently as to which >>> services are enabled by default. >>> This seems somewhat in active flux currently - so for the time being >>> enable the 2 services PMG needs unconditionally. >> >> Doesn't catches the on-top of plain Debian installation though? Why not >> address this in our clamav packages? > Would also be an option - but tbh - the current intermediate version we > ship should get replaced by the next update to clamav with (one of) the > next trixie point releases - and I'd want to avoid tracking clamav > ourselves, if the only diff is the service enablement. Why? I'd always want to track such core packages for a product to reduce reliance on external dependencies and avoid a few surprise like here, and it's not like it would be _that_ much work? > I sent a MR upstream last time (PMG 9.0): > https://salsa.debian.org/clamav-team/clamav/-/merge_requests/7 > while this was not merged as is - there have been 3-4 different variants > of how and which services are enabled and started in different branches > and tags on salsa. - I don't mean to complain - but to say that I think > this will take a while until the dust settles. Supports my point above.