Your message dated Sun, 12 Mar 2006 13:24:09 +0100
with message-id <[email protected]>
has caused the Debian Bug report #355057,
regarding avscan: Progress bar should include file count
to be marked as having been forwarded to the upstream software
author(s) Tara Milana <[email protected]>.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am
talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration
somewhere. Please contact me immediately.)
Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)
--- Begin Message ---
Re: avscan: Progress bar should include file count
Sun, 12 Mar 2006 13:24:09 +0100
here's a wishlist bug from a Debian user that sounds reasonable. I'm
not sure if displaying "7/9000" is reasonable as that would require
scanning the whole tree twice, but the current file number is
certainly a nice idea.
Re: A. Costa in <[email protected]>
> Package: avscan
> Version: 0.8.2-openssl-1
> Severity: wishlist
> The progress bar on 'avscan' consists of two elements:
> 1) On the left, a bar that goes back and forth.
> 2) On the right, text saying which file is being
> scanned, e.g. "Scanning:/foo/bar..."
> That looks quite good as a visual. Unfortunately the good
> looks are deceptive -- if a hard drive is being scanned, the
> display gives no clue as to when it'll finish. In particular:
> 1) The left element only shows that 'avscan' hasn't
> crashed -- otherwise it's vague.
> 2) The file name on the right isn't useful without knowing:
> a) How many files there are.
> b) Which file the current one is.
> Suggested improvements to the bar, starting with the easiest:
> 1) The right side could tell how many files there are,
> and which one the current one is. Example:
> "Scanning file #7 of 9000: /foo/bar..."
> 2) A bar beneath that might represent 7/9000 visually.
> 3) The left side might do the same for the current file.
> Most of the time that'd be quick, but for big files
> it would help.
> #3 seems the most difficult because I don't believe 'clamav' has any
> #provision for it.
> Another help, perhaps an optional one, would be to add up the
> total number of bytes that need scanning, and display how far
> along the scan is.
> Also of value: the start time of the scan, as well as the time elapsed.
> Motive: the other day I scanned a worried friend's machine, and maybe
> was expecting it to take an hour or so; it took almost 4 hours. It gave
> us a bad feeling! Which is not to say the job should have been faster,
> speed probably can't be helped and it was running on an older system, but
> users must be able to estimate how long a possibly crucial job might
> Hope this helps...
For the other two reports (#355196, #355197), I used the following
patches: (Debian changelog for reference)
diff -u avscan-0.8.2-openssl/debian/changelog
@@ -1,3 +1,11 @@
+avscan (0.8.2-openssl-2) unstable; urgency=low
+ * Fix grammar in winopcb.c (Closes: #355196).
+ * s/Unknown// for new scans in main window (but keep it in Scan Item
+ Properties; Closes: #355197).
+ -- Christoph Berg <[email protected]> Sun, 12 Mar 2006 12:54:35 +0100
avscan (0.8.2-openssl-1) unstable; urgency=low
* New upstream release, all changes got merged upstream.
@@ -463,7 +463,7 @@
const gchar *s = (t > 0l) ? ctime(&t) : "Unknown";
gchar *buf = g_strdup_printf(
- "Last Runned: %s", s
+ "Last Scanned: %s", s
@@ -423,7 +423,7 @@
time_t t = (time_t)((obj != NULL) ? obj->last_runned : 0l);
const gchar *s = (t > 0) ? TIME_DURATION_STRING(
core, cur_time - t, t
- ) : "Unknown";
+ ) : "";
clist, row, column,
(s != NULL) ? s : ""
[email protected] | http://www.df7cb.de/
--- End Message ---