Date: Fri, 5 Mar 2004 01:27:43 +0100 From: Ulrich Spoerlein <q@uni.de> To: Kirill Ponomarew <krion@FreeBSD.org> Cc: freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: ports/63767: [MAINTAINER] irc/eggdrop: Add SSL support Message-ID: <20040305002743.GA791@galgenberg.net> In-Reply-To: <200403042031.i24KVY7C057830@freefall.freebsd.org> References: <200403042031.i24KVY7C057830@freefall.freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--+HP7ph2BbKc20aGI Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, 04.03.2004 at 12:31:34 -0800, Kirill Ponomarew wrote: > Is it not better to move PATCH_* knobs to WITH_SSL option. > The users should decide whether they need it or not. This would require two different sets of patches, because files/patch-* are affected by the SSL-Patch too. Now what shall I do? Provide two versions of nearly all the patch-?? files? Rework the SSL-Patch on my own and upload it somewhere? Or better take the whole files/* dir and provide a big FreeBSD.patch and FreeBSD-SSL.patch and upload them somewhere? Ulrich Spoerlein --=20 PGP Key ID: F0DB9F44 Get it while it's hot! PGP Fingerprint: F1CE D062 0CA9 ADE3 349B 2FE8 980A C6B5 F0DB 9F44 I abhor a system designed for the "user", if that word is a coded pejorative meaning "stupid and unsophisticated". -- Ken Thompson --+HP7ph2BbKc20aGI Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFAR8l/mArGtfDbn0QRAkfRAJ9vW/udWDvAUZDWsFnp+bNC+fyy2gCeLIQB dJ0rt7lhmEOUwoAu1bWFH9Y= =SzjG -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --+HP7ph2BbKc20aGI--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040305002743.GA791>