From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Apr 4 12:27:17 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3725B1065673 for ; Wed, 4 Apr 2012 12:27:17 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jerry@seibercom.net) Received: from mail-yw0-f54.google.com (mail-yw0-f54.google.com [209.85.213.54]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CC5258FC0C for ; Wed, 4 Apr 2012 12:27:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: by yhgm50 with SMTP id m50so86252yhg.13 for ; Wed, 04 Apr 2012 05:27:16 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=date:from:to:subject:message-id:in-reply-to:references:reply-to :organization:x-mailer:face:mime-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:x-gm-message-state; bh=gE/q7pvMPjWin7Xlvpw5eXLSzCZvHgX5e7KjVJHzCUg=; b=NMJA+hEpPfvL+fBEdEep4BIF1lMv9l1YurQn6znKMzCk9PyrtwaQVsoOZJZXLUA+AA NYkDmhSjDdvD3a5Wz4UqM3/SDOvR1CicOW3jrqLkwUepdMghdvW0FC57Ophxq0oi1wQt 4EhbIfiKsW/e3KCV0FqO2nVdAzR8GtitueZ0uaJbsre+VIkXa/NjBZz+BzhI9llmOwpx LP5fcZ/KHEGCP2gSiFTGkv7e0Cd4+YVwEWoBlGsBomxxrcfjIqL/tHKTLZP1xVGGb+7A Ae9NBzJLwspXOcv98HIZkyydfPBequ8RPZE5/MYnCrgrnN7UStmNPcpGrbui3CQ2bz4f Jdrg== Received: by 10.236.161.73 with SMTP id v49mr14334707yhk.89.1333542435981; Wed, 04 Apr 2012 05:27:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from scorpio.seibercom.net (cpe-076-182-104-150.nc.res.rr.com. [76.182.104.150]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id g21sm768318ani.13.2012.04.04.05.27.14 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Wed, 04 Apr 2012 05:27:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from scorpio (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: jerry@scorpio.seibercom.net) by scorpio.seibercom.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3VN5yn0nhWz2CG5d for ; Wed, 4 Apr 2012 08:27:13 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2012 08:27:12 -0400 From: Jerry To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Message-ID: <20120404082712.26acc4b2@scorpio> In-Reply-To: <20348.13284.963931.392595@jerusalem.litteratus.org> References: <20120404065640.177c6b73@scorpio> <20348.13284.963931.392595@jerusalem.litteratus.org> Organization: seibercom.net X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.8.0 (GTK+ 2.24.6; amd64-portbld-freebsd8.2) Face: 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 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQlzALdSlmZtNv47Ha7prHnehGcdRRSyBngcueFg13Aq12AlG7GWskBFlK1dYPti+kyMUuFU Subject: Re: Updating GnuTLS to latest version X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 04 Apr 2012 12:27:17 -0000 On Wed, 4 Apr 2012 07:43:32 -0400 Robert Huff articulated: > > Jerry writes: > > > GnuTLS v3.0.18 was released on 2012-04-02. The latest port's > > versions are "gnutls-2.12.18" and "gnutls-devel-2.99.4" > > respectively. > > > > GnuTLS v3.0.18 is considered the latest stable build by the > > authors. Are there any plans to update the ports system to this > > version. In addition, since the port's "gnutls-devel-2.99.4" > > version is really not the latest experimental version any longer, > > shouldn't it be removed to avoid any confusion? > > Looking at the list of ports down-stream, I suspect this will > require substantial testing before any upgrade is puvlished. And > that doesn't count ports that may simply be unable to use it. The answer then is to simply do what has been done with other ports that have numerous major version numbers; i.e. Bash, MySQL, etcetera. Create a GnuTLS-2 and a GnuTLS-3 port and maintain the latest versions in each respective port. In fact, it is probably the only logical way to maintain this port correctly. Perhaps even creating a "GNUTLS_DEFAULT_VERSION=3" directive for the "/etc/make.conf" file. There are definitely numerous ways to handle this problem. The benefits are quite obvious. First, the newer port would be available for testing and use. Second, no matter how much pseudo testing is actually done by the port maintainer, etcetera, it will never match the actual results from having the port in general use by those who choose to use it. Reports of incompatibility, if any, would be greatly enhanced. As an example, I found I believe five ports that would not build with the OpenSSL port even though it had reportedly been "tested" prior to its release. Unless there is/are some show stopping problems with the newer version; exempli gratia "it doesn't build on FreeBSD", the rational for delaying its release seems rather counter productive. In any case, GnuTLS v3.0.0 was released on 2011-07-29 so it is not like this has suddenly been sprung upon the community. -- Jerry ♔ Disclaimer: off-list followups get on-list replies or get ignored. Please do not ignore the Reply-To header. __________________________________________________________________