From owner-freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Jan 21 09:50:11 2012 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 D5A04106566B for ; Sat, 21 Jan 2012 09:50:11 +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 C3F4F8FC12 for ; Sat, 21 Jan 2012 09:50:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id q0L9oBTR044820 for ; Sat, 21 Jan 2012 09:50:11 GMT (envelope-from gnats@freefall.freebsd.org) Received: (from gnats@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.14.5/8.14.5/Submit) id q0L9oBZ8044819; Sat, 21 Jan 2012 09:50:11 GMT (envelope-from gnats) Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2012 09:50:11 GMT Message-Id: <201201210950.q0L9oBZ8044819@freefall.freebsd.org> To: freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD.org From: Dominic Fandrey Cc: Subject: Re: ports/162996: games/ioquake3-devel: update s2064->s2202 X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports-bugs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: Dominic Fandrey List-Id: Ports bug reports List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2012 09:50:11 -0000 The following reply was made to PR ports/162996; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Dominic Fandrey To: bug-followup@FreeBSD.org Cc: Subject: Re: ports/162996: games/ioquake3-devel: update s2064->s2202 Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2012 10:43:16 +0100 This is a repost of a mail dating back to the 12th of January that didn't make it here because freebsd-ports-bugs was CCed instead of bug-followup. On 12/01/2012 10:04, scheidell@FreeBSD.org wrote: > Submitter: please update your ports tree, address the issues maintainer outlined in this pr and resubmit a patch. > > http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=162996 In my opinion all changes since 2194 aren't significant enough to justify an update. There's a cheat exploit addressed in 2214, which has some value to server operators. In my experience this kind of thing might cause some followup patches, though. Unless I overlooked something it might be a good idea to let that settle for a while. About the MASTERDIR issue, using MASTERDIR has certain drawbacks. Mainly using it will grow my Makefiles a little further. It doesn't really matter any more - so I'll properly do the conversion with the next update. Are there any objections to marking this PR obsolete/closed? On a sidenote, I'm considering splitting the ports into client and dedicated server ports - so that the server can be installed from binary packages without all the dependencies pulled in from the client. Any opinions on that? Regards -- A: Because it fouls the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? A: Top-posting. Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet and in e-mail?