From owner-freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Nov 10 09:30:14 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports-bugs@hub.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B8CBF106566B for ; Thu, 10 Nov 2011 09:30:14 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::28]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A8A858FC08 for ; Thu, 10 Nov 2011 09:30:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id pAA9UEZZ088929 for ; Thu, 10 Nov 2011 09:30:14 GMT (envelope-from gnats@freefall.freebsd.org) Received: (from gnats@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.14.4/8.14.4/Submit) id pAA9UEsK088926; Thu, 10 Nov 2011 09:30:14 GMT (envelope-from gnats) Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2011 09:30:14 GMT Message-Id: <201111100930.pAA9UEsK088926@freefall.freebsd.org> To: freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD.org From: vwe@freebsd.org Cc: Subject: Re: ports/162426: mail/postgrey bad postgrey_options default in rc.d file X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports-bugs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: vwe@freebsd.org List-Id: Ports bug reports List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2011 09:30:14 -0000 The following reply was made to PR ports/162426; it has been noted by GNATS. From: vwe@freebsd.org To: Darren Pilgrim Cc: bug-followup@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: ports/162426: mail/postgrey bad postgrey_options default in rc.d file Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2011 10:18:13 +0100 On 11/10/11 09:18, Darren Pilgrim wrote: > Yes, I'm aware, thanks. The commit that introduced the error has been > reverted. This PR can be closed. Dear Darren, I'm sorry to tell but I resist to close this PR as according to cvsweb (yes, I know cvsweb isn't authoritative) files/postgrey.in is still at rev 1.6, last modified at 2011-11-09, and hasn't been fixed yet. I can see, there has been a commit changing some of your ports' files some hours back, but the issue is still there. I was able to confirm cvsweb output by doing a fresh checkout of the ports tree. On a personal note, I do not recommend to roll back a bigger commit just to fix a minor problem. If a commit introduces a new problem, fixing just the new problem would be an appropriate action IMHO. YMMV but everything else makes the commit log harder to read and understand. Regards, Volker Werth