From nobody Sat Oct 9 14:17:07 2021 X-Original-To: ports@mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 21B4412D95C2; Sat, 9 Oct 2021 14:17:17 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from felix@palmen-it.de) Received: from stef.palmen-it.de (stef.palmen-it.de [IPv6:2001:470:1f0b:bbb:1::1]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange ECDHE (P-256) server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4HRRvw1xm1z4tKg; Sat, 9 Oct 2021 14:17:16 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from felix@palmen-it.de) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=palmen-it.de; s=20200414; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Type:MIME-Version: References:Message-ID:Subject:To:From:Date:Sender:Reply-To:Cc: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id: List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=jharVNuHwpK25h4wzal6u5cJNDfBqx8ZGuEqOFMvOtY=; b=SaJ7GP5FTK0cBtmxYMi7QVQ33K 59Hapy2Kp4omMutm33MoNsc2+zUr3BMyqNiCyTXq1c6nb0n9XN9uTvpprNt0Luo3Bz0Z2wSPugvDf 9Y3SAe1j6FTN/pAmTigJuIY6iNK9CXGZ2Hrs1Zqv6GJ0r9QMRZdjqp0i8wIhBc+V0rTArv6pvbxX+ gRV715Eau/OR96MrzOSQsHEEwtEaBVFyF/6wGgSwvtv50Uq0Iia/ku0nv2aYYOyBwkAfTWUQpKHHj tfWxtSAmr02+WOpB26e42w4lQtv6JqCNIA7ATA/nPIfGzJ2xmkePIZAhVjq9y/gNudcHrodZ/whs/ jEW/Ffdg==; Received: from [192.168.71.101] (helo=mail.home.palmen-it.de) by stef.palmen-it.de with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1mZD9x-002nEK-BR; Sat, 09 Oct 2021 16:17:09 +0200 Received: from nexus.home.palmen-it.de ([192.168.99.2]) by mail.home.palmen-it.de with esmtpsa (TLS1.3) tls TLS_CHACHA20_POLY1305_SHA256 (Exim 4.94.2 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1mZD9w-000IZj-St; Sat, 09 Oct 2021 14:17:08 +0000 Date: Sat, 9 Oct 2021 16:17:07 +0200 From: Felix Palmen To: ports@freebsd.org, freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: State of LibreSSL in FreeBSD ports Message-ID: <20211009141707.oicjg54owee5wfz2@nexus.home.palmen-it.de> Mail-Followup-To: ports@freebsd.org, freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Face: /1K@t"h.}e~pR@]c7HorQ!T`F^RJCa'BCr#e>IKA{>C/9OTGB4|xh"y2{?1Z5M i2w"AH^pN_LlHR^{+f',_Np~;.B;!M/bL}*qk]p5*r7F5vW};{:@4u5S?T&f0$7BJ-71Q5SV]:v$`5 A0[DZ:=?S52x8HJ~5@^P_\T@MsjG{R( Organization: palmen-it.de References: <20211003141654.bwlnlin6g3s2n5gt@nexus.home.palmen-it.de> <20211004182033.7iaeak3z2dgwdbhw@aching.in.mat.cc> <20211005063849.zjejmnaifve4gngz@nexus.home.palmen-it.de> List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Archive: https://lists.freebsd.org/archives/freebsd-ports List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Sender: owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="6xuq25yiix6s5q7n" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20211005063849.zjejmnaifve4gngz@nexus.home.palmen-it.de> User-Agent: NeoMutt/20210205 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4HRRvw1xm1z4tKg X-Spamd-Bar: -------- Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=pass header.d=palmen-it.de header.s=20200414 header.b=SaJ7GP5F; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=palmen-it.de; spf=pass (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of felix@palmen-it.de designates 2001:470:1f0b:bbb:1::1 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=felix@palmen-it.de X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-8.80 / 15.00]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; R_DKIM_ALLOW(-0.20)[palmen-it.de:s=20200414]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; DWL_DNSWL_MED(-2.00)[palmen-it.de:dkim]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+ip6:2001:470:1f0b:bbb:1::1]; MIME_GOOD(-0.20)[multipart/signed,text/plain]; TO_DN_NONE(0.00)[]; RCVD_DKIM_ARC_DNSWL_MED(-0.50)[]; HAS_ORG_HEADER(0.00)[]; RCVD_COUNT_THREE(0.00)[3]; MID_RHS_MATCH_FROMTLD(0.00)[]; DKIM_TRACE(0.00)[palmen-it.de:+]; RCPT_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; DMARC_POLICY_ALLOW(-0.50)[palmen-it.de,none]; RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED(-0.20)[2001:470:1f0b:bbb:1::1:from]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-1.00)[-1.000]; SIGNED_PGP(-2.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_SHORT(-1.00)[-1.000]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+,1:+,2:~]; ASN(0.00)[asn:6939, ipnet:2001:470::/32, country:US]; RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[] X-ThisMailContainsUnwantedMimeParts: N --6xuq25yiix6s5q7n Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable * Felix Palmen [20211005 08:38]: > If that would be consensus, I think it would be better to remove the > option altogether. What's the point of having a totally unsupported and > experimental option in ports anyways? To get that straight, I think a decision is needed here. Either libressl in ports is supported, IMHO, that would mean: * try to push necessary patches upstream * if that's not possible, maintain them locally * if that's not possible (e.g. because the patch is really intrusive and needs to change all the time), mark the port BROKEN/IGNORE with libressl * It's never ok to have a build failure OR libressl is *not* supported, then I really think it should be removed =66rom DEFAULT_VERSIONS. --=20 Dipl.-Inform. Felix Palmen ,.//.......... {web} http://palmen-it.de {jabber} [see email] ,//palmen-it.de {pgp public key} http://palmen-it.de/pub.txt // """"""""""" {pgp fingerprint} A891 3D55 5F2E 3A74 3965 B997 3EF2 8B0A BC02 DA2A --6xuq25yiix6s5q7n Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEzBAABCAAdFiEEqJE9VV8uOnQ5ZbmXPvKLCrwC2ioFAmFhpFoACgkQPvKLCrwC 2iq+eQgAh5tbc13Q41b2fC9H6l/IcuypEl04oc3NXbsbAjCUL++0P3qPWjE0yhjd +d2/+cOWISBnKLkAbFIJW/sFdRfYN4+3X/WRoPJ2np/Iz5InibQ0f2Ewk6aYshKM OfhlhYAmWCz9Zz4Y5kMTxWRdLrcuiI5bjRO69K7Lafdo7mvs3oiiFILWqtUrFZDo FyQjSy+VRxI3vK38AJS7tgd/c9QUQY5FMAbsjRWgj7jB8s9OCVAWToPh6qi8ZWGW laem65O+FmtHVLBG9beP9uj2Fnas/w0ptOyVX6rAtZXwNBvRoylrzSQcIKBdryyo E9rkpeuN3mO+T8l5DRHIhD7aqLkJow== =0zHU -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --6xuq25yiix6s5q7n--