Date: Fri, 2 Mar 2007 13:53:18 -0500 From: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> To: Mij <mij@bitchx.it> Cc: cvs-ports@FreeBSD.org, Cheng-Lung Sung <clsung@FreeBSD.org>, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, ports-committers@FreeBSD.org, Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/security/sshguard Makefile Message-ID: <20070302185318.GA30351@xor.obsecurity.org> In-Reply-To: <44226B29-C2D1-4CF9-A0F9-FC661D5691C5@bitchx.it> References: <200703011006.l21A6EKZ036332@repoman.freebsd.org> <20070302164917.GA28444@xor.obsecurity.org> <44226B29-C2D1-4CF9-A0F9-FC661D5691C5@bitchx.it>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--d6Gm4EdcadzBjdND Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Fri, Mar 02, 2007 at 07:49:42PM +0100, Mij wrote: >=20 > On 02/mar/07, at 17:49, Kris Kennaway wrote: >=20 > >On Thu, Mar 01, 2007 at 10:06:14AM +0000, Cheng-Lung Sung wrote: > >>clsung 2007-03-01 10:06:14 UTC > >> > >> FreeBSD ports repository > >> > >> Modified files: > >> security/sshguard Makefile > >> Log: > >> - respect maintainer's insist on interactive part, > >> even IS_INTERACTIVE is discouraged >=20 > not glad to see such comment >=20 >=20 > >This is disappointing. Can the maintainer explain why? >=20 > the app requires the user to choose what firewall to support for =20 > building: IPFW or PF. > They are in XOR and there is no reasonable default in this. >=20 > Cheng-Lung chose PF default and removed is_interactive. > A feedback request would have avoided this qui pro quo. IS_INTERACTIVE should *never* be used when there is a possible alternative. The obvious choice here (if you really cannot decide on a default) is to make your port in two variants, one a slave of the other, which enable either option. > >And what is this? :) >=20 > this used to be ".error blah" for checking the options' XOR-ness, =20 > then removed because > options are also set when deinstalling/cleaning etc. Definitely =20 > useless, replacing with a > comment about the problem appears the best to do. Actually I dunno =20 > why this made its way > in the submission :) OK, I assume you'll fix this? Kris --d6Gm4EdcadzBjdND Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFF6HKeWry0BWjoQKURAvwqAJ4xqYi3xwK8eNPnTzgVHhW1j3TVpQCeKHfG 9L2WJcTo0Nms8X8430wAego= =lqBn -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --d6Gm4EdcadzBjdND--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20070302185318.GA30351>