Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2008 02:16:08 +0300 From: Eygene Ryabinkin <rea-fbsd@codelabs.ru> To: delphij@FreeBSD.org Cc: freebsd-security@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ports/129000: [vuxml] mail/dovecot: document CVE-2008-4577 and CVE-2008-4578 Message-ID: <guGcHD7FV7OtwPuVBjzjkm7xoOU@20cDGM%2B8hsk/QFQ6RA5/3vpdoQo> In-Reply-To: <200811192237.mAJMbCnZ038587@freefall.freebsd.org> References: <200811192237.mAJMbCnZ038587@freefall.freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
[-- Attachment #1 --]
Xin, good day.
Wed, Nov 19, 2008 at 10:37:12PM +0000, delphij@FreeBSD.org wrote:
> Synopsis: [vuxml] mail/dovecot: document CVE-2008-4577 and CVE-2008-4578
>
> State-Changed-From-To: open->closed
> State-Changed-By: delphij
> State-Changed-When: Wed Nov 19 22:36:55 UTC 2008
> State-Changed-Why:
> Committed with some changes, thanks!
Thanks for handling this. But I have a question: what is the general
policy about versions that are to be documented within the 'range'
clauses? You had changed version specification to '1.1.4', but it was
never been in the FreeBSD ports tree. So, should we specify only
existing port versions or we can specify vendor-specific versions as
well, provided that the specification will be the same from the point of
view of the port version evolution?
Thanks again!
--
Eygene
_ ___ _.--. #
\`.|\..----...-'` `-._.-'_.-'` # Remember that it is hard
/ ' ` , __.--' # to read the on-line manual
)/' _/ \ `-_, / # while single-stepping the kernel.
`-'" `"\_ ,_.-;_.-\_ ', fsc/as #
_.-'_./ {_.' ; / # -- FreeBSD Developers handbook
{_.-``-' {_/ #
[-- Attachment #2 --]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (FreeBSD)
iEYEARECAAYFAkkknjgACgkQthUKNsbL7Yj2KQCeLZfzuBsnr8nls+xVwiwGaMoP
z+cAn2rbhE7E06TwWqhTbkYKIAC0vN3g
=oO1+
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?guGcHD7FV7OtwPuVBjzjkm7xoOU>