Displaying 20 results from an estimated 5000 matches similar to: "[LLVMdev] LNT ClamAV - Sorting output"
2013 Apr 02
0
[LLVMdev] LNT ClamAV - Sorting output
Hi Renato,
What is it that makes the output of the program asynchronous? The output is
deterministic on Darwin, so it seems like it should be possible to make it
more stable.
I'm not really a fan of doing any more transformations on the output than
we have to, because it just pushes complexity into the test suite
infrastructure.
- Daniel
On Tue, Apr 2, 2013 at 10:05 AM, Renato Golin
2013 Apr 02
2
[LLVMdev] LNT ClamAV - Sorting output
On 04/02/2013 11:06 PM, Daniel Dunbar wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 2, 2013 at 11:46 AM, Renato Golin <renato.golin at linaro.org <mailto:renato.golin at linaro.org>> wrote:
>
> On 2 April 2013 19:20, Daniel Dunbar <daniel at zuster.org <mailto:daniel at zuster.org>> wrote:
>
> What is it that makes the output of the program asynchronous? The output is
2013 Apr 02
0
[LLVMdev] LNT ClamAV - Sorting output
On 2 April 2013 21:20, Török Edwin <edwin+ml-debian at etorok.net> wrote:
> You can pass all the filenames from the inputs/ directory directly on the
> command-line, instead of specifying -r inputs/.
> That way the order of scanning will be exactly the one specified on the
> command-line.
>
Hum, I think I can fix that with Make...
--renato
-------------- next part
2013 Apr 02
2
[LLVMdev] LNT ClamAV - Sorting output
On 2 April 2013 19:20, Daniel Dunbar <daniel at zuster.org> wrote:
> What is it that makes the output of the program asynchronous? The output
> is deterministic on Darwin, so it seems like it should be possible to make
> it more stable.
>
This is a virus scan and, AFAICS, depends on the order in which the INODEs
are laid out in the directory. I'm not sure there is a way to
2013 Apr 02
3
[LLVMdev] LNT ClamAV - Sorting output
Hi Torok,
I've used a hard-coded list on the input parameter and still got some
output (slightly) scrambled between two different bots...
INPUT = $(PROJ_SRC_DIR)/inputs/clam.cab \
$(PROJ_SRC_DIR)/inputs/clamdoc.tar.gz \
$(PROJ_SRC_DIR)/inputs/clam.exe \
$(PROJ_SRC_DIR)/inputs/clam.exe.bz2 \
$(PROJ_SRC_DIR)/inputs/clam-v2.rar \
2013 Apr 02
0
[LLVMdev] LNT ClamAV - Sorting output
On Tue, Apr 2, 2013 at 11:46 AM, Renato Golin <renato.golin at linaro.org>wrote:
> On 2 April 2013 19:20, Daniel Dunbar <daniel at zuster.org> wrote:
>
>> What is it that makes the output of the program asynchronous? The output
>> is deterministic on Darwin, so it seems like it should be possible to make
>> it more stable.
>>
>
> This is a virus
2008 Jan 08
2
[LLVMdev] Adding ClamAV to the llvm testsuite (long)
Hi Edwin,
I ran into two problems.
1. Using your config file and Makefile, I ran into issue compiling
with gcc:
gcc -I/Users/echeng/LLVM/llvm/projects/llvm-test/MultiSource/
Applications/ClamAV -I/Users/echeng/LLVM/llvm/projects/llvm-test/
MultiSource/Applications/ClamAV -I/\Users/echeng/LLVM/llvm/include -I/
Users/echeng/LLVM/llvm/projects/llvm-test/include -I../../..//include
2007 Dec 18
0
[LLVMdev] Adding ClamAV to the llvm testsuite (long)
Chris Lattner wrote:
> One way to do this is to add a "cut down" version of the app to the
> test suite.
I disabled optional features in clamav-config.h
>
>> 2. GPL license. Chris?
>
> Any open source license that allows unrestricted redistribution is
> fine in llvm-test
Ok, I have created a script that automatically checks out ClamAV
0.92-stable source code
2008 Jan 14
2
[LLVMdev] Adding ClamAV to the llvm testsuite (long)
I've filed
http://www.llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=1912
for the optimizer bug.
Evan
On Jan 10, 2008, at 11:28 AM, Evan Cheng wrote:
> Hi,
>
> We are getting closer.
>
> 1. In Makefile, all the references to CFLAGS should be CPPFLAGS
> instead.
> 2. filterdiff.sh uses sed -re. This causes a problem on Mac OS X where
> -E means using extended regular expression, not
2008 Jan 10
0
[LLVMdev] Adding ClamAV to the llvm testsuite (long)
Hi,
We are getting closer.
1. In Makefile, all the references to CFLAGS should be CPPFLAGS instead.
2. filterdiff.sh uses sed -re. This causes a problem on Mac OS X where
-E means using extended regular expression, not -r.
sed: illegal option -- r
usage: sed script [-Ealn] [-i extension] [file ...]
sed [-Ealn] [-i extension] [-e script] ... [-f
script_file] ... [file ...]
Can this
2007 Dec 18
3
[LLVMdev] Adding ClamAV to the llvm testsuite (long)
On Mon, 17 Dec 2007, Evan Cheng wrote:
> We always welcome more tests. But it looks like there are two issues
> here.
>
> 1. The autoconf requirement. Is it possible to get one configuration
> working without the need for autoconf?
One way to do this is to add a "cut down" version of the app to the test
suite.
> 2. GPL license. Chris?
Any open source license that
2013 Mar 12
2
[LLVMdev] LNT BenchmarkGame
On 12 March 2013 16:21, Duncan Sands <baldrick at free.fr> wrote:
> IIRC the reference output is not used by default. You have to put
> USE_REFERENCE_OUTPUT := 1
> in the Makefile in order to make use of the reference output. As
> BenchmarkGame doesn't have this, are you sure the reference output
> is causing the problem?
>
That was my initial assumption, too. But
2008 Jan 10
4
[LLVMdev] Adding ClamAV to the llvm testsuite (long)
Török Edwin wrote:
> Yes, I have uploaded the .tar.gz here:
> http://edwintorok.googlepages.com/ClamAV-srcflat.tar.gz
> [inputs dir contains some symlink, place ClamAV dir in
> llvm/projects/llvm-test/MultiSource/Applications to make
> links point to right place]
>
>
Hi,
Because llvm bug #1730 got fixed, this testcase can run under with the
JIT on x86-64 :).
I have
2010 Apr 13
3
ClamAV "clamscan" command using huge amount of RAM
We have a perl cgi script that accepts uploaded files and runs
clamscan on them. While observing the system performance I noticed
that each clamscan process consumes up to 250MB of RAM. Is this
normal for ClamAV? This seems like an enormous amount of RAM, for
simply scanning one file for viruses.
2013 Mar 12
5
[LLVMdev] LNT BenchmarkGame
On 12 March 2013 14:24, Tim Northover <t.p.northover at gmail.com> wrote:
> Could be worth a try. But if that thing really is generating random
> numbers I'm not sure replacing one genuine cast-iron random number
> with another is the best solution long-term.
>
The test is initializing srand(1), so in theory, it shouldn't be different
between compilers, since Clang is
2019 Feb 07
2
Did I install too much for clamav?
I just checked the status of amavisd:
# systemctl -l status amavisd
? amavisd.service - Amavisd-new is an interface between MTA and content
checkers.
?? Loaded: loaded (/usr/lib/systemd/system/amavisd.service; enabled;
vendor preset: disabled)
?? Active: active (running) since Thu 2019-02-07 08:16:59 EST; 7h ago
???? Docs: http://www.ijs.si/software/amavisd/#doc
? Process: 5715
2013 Mar 12
0
[LLVMdev] LNT BenchmarkGame
Hi Renato,
On 12/03/13 15:33, Renato Golin wrote:
> On 12 March 2013 14:24, Tim Northover <t.p.northover at gmail.com
> <mailto:t.p.northover at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> Could be worth a try. But if that thing really is generating random
> numbers I'm not sure replacing one genuine cast-iron random number
> with another is the best solution long-term.
2016 Sep 29
3
Centos 7.2.1511 with sendmail and a problem with clamav
Everyone,
I am putting together a new CentOS 7 mail server for our organization
and am having some difficulty getting clamav to work with the clamav-
milter for sendmail.
I have set /etc/clamd.d/scan.conf to use clamscan as the user as well
as root as the user and the status command of systemctl results in the
same error messages :
? clamd at scan.service - Generic clamav scanner daemon
2013 Apr 03
0
[LLVMdev] LNT ClamAV - Sorting output
On 04/03/2013 01:20 AM, Renato Golin wrote:
> Hi Torok,
>
> I've used a hard-coded list on the input parameter and still got some output (slightly) scrambled between two different bots...
>
> I though the dbdir could be the culprit, but it has only one file. Attached is the output of both.
>
The version of ClamAV in the LLVM test-suite is quite old, and it first unpacks
2013 Apr 19
2
[LLVMdev] LNT ClamAV - Sorting output
On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 1:13 PM, Renato Golin <renato.golin at linaro.org>wrote:
> On 19 April 2013 17:48, Török Edwin <edwin at etorok.net> wrote:
>
>> Otherwise what might seem like a 20% improvement
>> could very well be just a 0.2% improvement in practice.
>>
>
> This is (maybe to a lesser extent) what happens with most of our
> benchmarks, and