toggle

AAPL Stock: 441.35 ( + 1.69 )

http://www.macnn.com/articles/03/02/10/virex.7.2/

Virex 7.2 update conflicts with latest Fink

updated 03:35 am EST, Mon February 10, 2003

 
", 0, 0);


reports that the "Virex 7.2 package, currently being distributed free to all .Mac members, has a serious conflict with Fink. Fink users should not install Virex 7.2 under any circumstances. Installing it after Fink is installed will damage your Fink installation; installing it prior to Fink will make it impossible to install Fink without damaging Virex."


by MacNN Staff

Post tools:

TAGS :

 troubleshooting

Related Articles

Recent Articles

toggle

Comments

  1. MacNN.com Reader

    Fresh-Faced Recruit

    Joined: Jul 2001

    0
    02/10, 07:55am | report spam | Reply |

    Removing Virex

    How do you remove Virex then. This would have been nice to know about a week ago.

  1. MacNN.com Reader

    Fresh-Faced Recruit

    Joined: Jul 2001

    0
    02/10, 08:31am | report spam | Reply |

    Virex 7.2 issues

    In addition to the Fink problem, Virex 7.2 has issues w/ it's e-update feature. It asks you for your .Mac name and password, but then does not accept them once they are entered. Another minor annoyance is the now visible 'sw' folder at the root of the drive (this is part of the Fink problem..)

    Overall, very annoying, hope they resolve it quickly.

  1. MacNN.com Reader

    Fresh-Faced Recruit

    Joined: Jul 2001

    0
    02/10, 10:44am | report spam | Reply |

    Look here

    See this link for an explaination of how incredibly stupid McAfee's engineers are:

    http://forums.mcafeehelp.com/viewtopic.php?t=6318&sid=33d08f3c34f7e09dc546aa1ddf1c299c

  1. MacNN.com Reader

    Fresh-Faced Recruit

    Joined: Jul 2001

    0
    02/10, 11:31am | report spam | Reply |

    Virex Problems

    McCaffe morons built the Virex app off of Fink-installed libraries. That's why stuff is installed in /sw: the authors must have had Fink installed, and stupidly used them to build the app. Since they were too lazy to rebuild it with the libraries installed internally, they forced you to install files in /sw. Thus corrupting Fink.

    Not only that, but the libraries installed, they are GNU libraries. Anything GNU requires you to put a copy of the GNU licence with it. Since MaCaffe didn't bother to do that, they are thus breaking the GNU licence. Taking credit for other author's work.

    I'm telling you, stay the h*** away from Virex. One of their "updates" is going to end up formatting your HD: mark my words.

  1. MacNN.com Reader

    Fresh-Faced Recruit

    Joined: Jul 2001

    0
    02/10, 12:48pm | report spam | Reply |

    stupidty and One question

    First off, I'd probably put the issue more to ignorance than stupidity (its easy to read someone else's analysis, then go "Geesh, how stupid. Any idiot should've known that!").

    Second, is there some reason that they couldn't or didn't use OS X's included version of curl (it does still include curl, doesn't it)? Or did they just link to the wrong instance of it? (Or does it not use and SSL security, and these folks apparently wanted some type of secure connection, which I guess would be a good thing for a virus definition download?)

    Third, going along with number 2 above, Jaguar now installs the BSD layer by default, and you can't "not install" it like you used to be able to in x.1. Is that correct (i.e. do developers writing to v10.2 have to worry about BSD programs not being there?).

  1. MacNN.com Reader

    Fresh-Faced Recruit

    Joined: Jul 2001

    0
    02/10, 12:50pm | report spam | Reply |

    s**** this talk...

    I read that the Dell Dude was arrested for marijuana possession...gee, he didn't seem like a guy on drugs.

  1. MacNN.com Reader

    Fresh-Faced Recruit

    Joined: Jul 2001

    0
    02/10, 12:50pm | report spam | Reply |

    Re: Number 2

    Third, going along with number 2 above

    Heh-heh-heh-heh-heh He said 'number two'.

  1. MacNN.com Reader

    Fresh-Faced Recruit

    Joined: Jul 2001

    0
    02/10, 01:04pm | report spam | Reply |

    Mistake? Yes. Stupid? No

    To me, the thread mentioned in 'Look here'. It does not indicate 'incredibly stupid' developers. Instead, it indicates mistakes of about the magnitude one can make fairly easily. Thus far, we see two of them, and both are sins of omission that do not indicate a fatally flawed process.

    Point the first - they did include the Curl license in the readme. They blew it by not including the ssl license. A definite error, and one that I suspect their legal staff is rather annoyed with. Given, though, that they did get one of the licenses, this shows clear intent to deliver them. They still need to do so, but the mistake is not intent to defraud, merely a failure to completely carry out the legal necessities. Very different kettle of fish.

    Similarly, linking directly to fink is clearly incorrect, and a mistake I suspect the developer rather regrets. During development, I suspect they were futzing around trying to get it to work, and neglected to do the last step of running otool once all the pieces worked. It does appear they have done so for other items, so it is not utter cluelessness, but instead a second mistake.

    It is not a cheery thing when you spot an error in a package, but I would rather spot them making what appear to be honest mistakes without ill intent or evidence of stupidity than either of the other cases.

    As far as the tech support person not knowing the details of fink, are we surprised? After all, had the buildmiester done his or her job correctly, the libs would have been packaged inside the app, and the help desk person would never have needed to know where it came from.

    So, again, definite mistakes, but I do not see evidence of stupidity lurking in there. Pity that installer technology makes it so easy to mess things up in this way. (And no, I do not work for macaffee, I just get vexed when I see a single boneheaded moment magnified into an accusation of utter incompetence.)

  1. MacNN.com Reader

    Fresh-Faced Recruit

    Joined: Jul 2001

    0
    02/10, 03:10pm | report spam | Reply |

    Re: Mistake


    As far as the tech support person not knowing the details of fink, are we surprised?

    No, but basically because tech support people tend not to be very 'techie', so I doubt they would have heard of Fink (h***, most Mac users haven't heard of it, and far less install/use it).

Login Here

Not a member of the MacNN forums? Register now for free.

 
close
Photo
toggle

Network Headlines

toggle

Most Popular

MacNN Sponsor

Recent Reviews

MaxUpgrades MaxConnect for 2006-2008 Mac Pro

Nobody outside of Cupertino's privileged bunch knows the future of the Mac Pro line for sure. Despite Apple's reluctance to tell us wh ...

Brother HL-3170CDW LED Printer

We've mentioned before that we are far from a paperless society. For now, at least, there are tasks that require a piece of paper for ...

HTC One

It is hard to overstate just how critically important the HTC One is to the Taiwanese company’s fortunes. Despite its alarming decline ...

toggle

Most Commented

 

Popular News