Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 2 Sep 2000 14:56:03 -0500
From:      Dan Nelson <dnelson@emsphone.com>
To:        John Galt <galt@inconnu.isu.edu>
Cc:        Mike Meyer <mwm@mired.org>, rob <europax@home.com>, Johannes Zwart <johannes@jak.nl>, questions@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: Why not XEmacs, after all?
Message-ID:  <20000902145603.A28852@dan.emsphone.com>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0009021339300.22061-100000@inconnu.isu.edu>; from "John Galt" on Sat Sep  2 13:46:56 GMT 2000
References:  <20000902142354.A20066@dan.emsphone.com> <Pine.LNX.4.21.0009021339300.22061-100000@inconnu.isu.edu>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In the last episode (Sep 02), John Galt said:
> Bullmerde!  4.0 pulled a week ago from ftp install, on a brand new
> machine.  cd /usr/ports/lynx;make install  I get a error stating that
> lynx has a few security holes in it.  It's deprecated.

Why in the world are you installing 4.0 instead of 4.1?  4.0 was
released in March, and back then, lynx _was_ insecure, so the ports
tree that came with 4.0 had it marked as insecure.  The bugs have long
since been fixed, and if you would update your ports tree, either with
cvsup or by going to http://www.freebsd.org/ports, you would notice
that it's no longer marked FORBIDDEN.

-- 
	Dan Nelson
	dnelson@emsphone.com


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20000902145603.A28852>