> If really worried, grab sources, compile it yourself, and re-scan it. > whether they scan stuff in advance before offering it for download. > You'd have to personally ask BOCHS devs or SF admins I don't need the monstrous "virus detection" crap. > (email): "The file 'Bochs-2.6.7.exe' has been determined to be
> If you have, has it matched the size and MD5 which I posted ? # a good DOSser downloads stuff only from trusted pages and authors that don't contain virii # a good DOSser knows what's going on eir system, a virus has no chance to hide # not a single virus (less than 15 years old) works in DOS Yes, it was the same, see my quote from PuppyLinux above. > ? If you have, has it matched the size and MD5 which I posted ?
#Descargar bochs 2.5.1 windows#
> Now please, have you downloaded the windows prebuilt executable in question Don't forget that "agricola" is "m." but "virtus" (manliness, courage) is "f."! Lingua latina, which is derided more widely than DOS! Yes, I took that in high school, I liked ancient things even then. > NOT resemble viri, nor virii ! Ergo, in English, we should write viruses. > "neutral" and without a plural (in latin). Virus/ is a latin word belonging to gender And yes I still get false positives from time to time, usually whenever I try to compile something ultra trivial with an obscure compiler. Months back, even Avira stopped working/updating, and I couldn't even successfully reinstall. I'm just unlucky by birth, I guess, stuff always breaks for me. > Why would I ? It is non obnoxious and it is very very infrequently flagging Only download/install stuff for Windows under VMware/VBox/Hyper-V.ģ). Constantly (x 11, eat roast beef) send false positives to AV makers (and/or disable heuristics entirely and/or locally whitelist any specific programs and/or disable realtime scanning entirely).Ģ). It's really annoying, but there is no good solution.ġ). Just from my own limited experience, many many compilers' output mistakenly gets flagged. If really worried, grab sources, compile it yourself, and re-scan it.īut actually, don't. You'd have to personally ask BOCHS devs or SF admins whether they scan stuff in advance before offering it for download. > centers is not totally out of the question, imho.
#Descargar bochs 2.5.1 download#
> Although rare, an infection affecting Sourceforge's approved download I don't know nearly enough (practically nil) about Win32/installers/.DLLs/APIs. gives a better answer than we ever could. > I didn't, that's why I asked for second opinions ! > Did you forget that most antiviruses have tons of false positives due to Now please, have you downloaded the windows prebuilt executable in question ? If you have, has it matched the size and MD5 which I posted ? If its plural existed, it woud NOT resemble viri, nor virii ! Ergo, in English, we should write : Virus/ is a latin word belonging to gender "neutral" and without a plural (in latin). Why would I ? It is non obnoxious and it is very very infrequently flagging downloads that I do. I didn't, that's why I asked for second opinions !Īlthough rare, an infection affecting Sourceforge's approved download centers is not totally out of the question, wrote : > Did you forget that most antiviruses have tons of false positives due to bad heuristics? > saying it is or contains "TR/Dropper.Gen"! I'd like second advices wrote : (Mon Nov 10, 05:26 PM) /tmp/doydoy # ls -log > md5sum : 6bd870625f8346021c0e0c620dd55980ĭid you forget that most antiviruses have tons of false positives due to bad heuristics? See here.Īlso, did you forget about Virus Total? A quick (re)scan online shows only one out of 55 complaining (guess which one). > Though I would trust Sourceforge not to point to infected downloads, > saying it is or contains "TR/Dropper.Gen"! Uh the "Avira antivirus" went mad about the download Bochs-2.6.7.exe
0 kommentar(er)
