F-Prot for Linux

tk wrote:


>
>
> The *nix version are typical *nix.. console based. What's wrong with the
> console? =(
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> tk
>

Hi tk, thanks for responding. I'm not quite sure what you mean, *nix console
based - does that mean that it is not possible do call up the av scanner
except through a terminal window?

Cheers,

Sammy Hall, Jr.
 >> Stay informed about: F-Prot for Linux 

Sammy Hall, Jr. wrote:

> tk wrote:
>>
>>The *nix version are typical *nix.. console based. What's wrong with the
>>console? =(
>
>
> Hi tk, thanks for responding. I'm not quite sure what you mean, *nix console
> based - does that mean that it is not possible do call up the av scanner
> except through a terminal window?

no, more along the lines of 'you need to issue a console command to
call up the av'... your real dilemma here doesn't really have much of
anything to do with anti-virus issues, but instead figuring out how to
add custom menu options that issue the console command of your choosing...

--
"hungry people don't stay hungry for long
they get hope from fire and smoke as the weak grow strong
hungry people don't stay hungry for long
they get hope from fire and smoke as they reach for the dawn"
 >> Stay informed about: F-Prot for Linux 

kurt wismer wrote:

> Sammy Hall, Jr. wrote:
>
>> tk wrote:
>>>
>>>The *nix version are typical *nix.. console based. What's wrong with the
>>>console? =(
>>
>>
>> Hi tk, thanks for responding. I'm not quite sure what you mean, *nix
>> console based - does that mean that it is not possible do call up the av
>> scanner except through a terminal window?
>
> no, more along the lines of 'you need to issue a console command to
> call up the av'... your real dilemma here doesn't really have much of
> anything to do with anti-virus issues, but instead figuring out how to
> add custom menu options that issue the console command of your choosing...
>

Yes, I'm afraid you're right, Kurt, it isn't an anti-virus issue as such, I
can see that.
At the same time, however, ease of use of a DOS type scanner, for on-demand
scanning may be an issue. I was thinking along the lines of the registry
additions that I used under Windows, namely:

REGEDIT4

[HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\c:\F-Prot]
@="Scan with F-Prot"

[HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\c:\F-Prot\F-Prot.exe]
@="C:\\F-Prot\\F-Prot.exe /PACKED \"%1\""

[HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\c:\F-Prot]
@="Scan with F-Prot"

[HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\c:\shell\F-Prot\F-Prot.exe]
@="C:\\F-Prot\\F-Prot.exe /ARCHIVE /PACKED \"%1\""

[HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\*\shell\F-Prot]
@="Scan with F-Prot"

[HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\*\shell\F-Prot\command]
@="C:\\F-Prot\\F-Prot.exe /ARCHIVE /PACKED /DUMB \"%1\""

Though of course I understand that Linux is a different world into which
I've only just been born

Thanks for your comments.

Regards,

Sammy Hall, Jr
 >> Stay informed about: F-Prot for Linux