From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Sep 5 12:41:00 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx2.freebsd.org (mx2.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::35]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8F8D4106566B for ; Mon, 5 Sep 2011 12:41:00 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from dougb@FreeBSD.org) Received: from 172-17-198-245.globalsuite.net (hub.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::36]) by mx2.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 702AE176155; Mon, 5 Sep 2011 12:40:58 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <4E64C35A.50004@FreeBSD.org> Date: Mon, 05 Sep 2011 05:40:58 -0700 From: Doug Barton Organization: http://SupersetSolutions.com/ User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:6.0.1) Gecko/20110901 Thunderbird/6.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Julian H. Stacey" References: <201109050933.p859XEbP004874@fire.js.berklix.net> In-Reply-To: <201109050933.p859XEbP004874@fire.js.berklix.net> X-Enigmail-Version: undefined OpenPGP: id=1A1ABC84 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: ports@freebsd.org, Chris Rees Subject: Re: sysutils/cfs X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 05 Sep 2011 12:41:00 -0000 On 09/05/2011 02:33, Julian H. Stacey wrote: > Chris Rees wrote: >> On 4 September 2011 21:32, Julian H. Stacey wrote: >>>> >>>> Whoops, also missed a CVE -- buffer overflows can cause a DoS. >>>> Expiration date altered to 1 month accordingly. >>> >>> It is not responsible to threaten to remove ports without warning >>> between releases for non urgent reasons. We understand that this is your perspective, however the community in general has a different idea. >>> Better to deprecate such non urgent ports, & wait a while after next >>> release is rolled, to give release users a warning & some time >>> to volunteer (or if a firm using releases, perhaps time to allocate >>> a staff member if a port is important to them). That's an interesting idea, but incredibly unlikely to happen. >> Yeah... perhaps if there isn't a vulnerability. At the moment it's >> marked FORBIDDEN, > > Correction: > "At the moment" all those with 8.2-RELEASE/ports still see no FORBIDDEN, That's what portaudit is for. > The Attic is the standard myopic excuse, ignoring not all FreeBSD > release users have CVS, It is available to everyone, and trivial to configure. The fact that removed ports still exist in CVS is not a "myopic excuse," it's a fact. We need to make the best decisions we can to provide the best support possible for the largest percentage of our users. -- Nothin' ever doesn't change, but nothin' changes much. -- OK Go Breadth of IT experience, and depth of knowledge in the DNS. Yours for the right price. :) http://SupersetSolutions.com/