Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 19 Mar 2018 03:59:02 +0000
From:      bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org
To:        freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   [Bug 222718] net/opensips Makes Python, RabbitMQ and Redis optional
Message-ID:  <bug-222718-13-dCRy8kahbr@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-222718-13@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
References:  <bug-222718-13@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D222718

--- Comment #6 from Euan Thoms <euan@potensol.com> ---
(In reply to OlivierW from comment #5)

Olivier, thanks you for your input. And apologies for my late reply as
maintainer of the net/opensips port.

Unfortunately, I stumbled on this bug report after a recent port upgrade to
2.2.6. Otherwise I may have included it into that upgrade patch.

I was sort of expecting some user to suggest more granular port options as =
some
point. When I initially created the port, there was a lot of other stuff to
focus on and get right. For a long time, the development port was not stable
for me. At least in my setup inside a jail. It seems to have proven stable =
now,
perhaps upstream has fixed a FreeBSD specific segfault or similar. The way
OpenSIPS is designed (very modular) means there are potentially a lot of po=
rt
option permutations. So I decided to wait until someone reported as use case
that calls for an expansion to the available port options.

I have no problem making Python, Redis and Rabbit-MQ seperate options. I th=
ink
it absolutely makes sense. In fact, subject to some research, we could maybe
make at least Python turned OFF by default.

However, I want to let the existing upgrade patch go through first and let =
it
stabilise. There are some key changes to the port, mainly the introduction =
of
process owner in the rc script, and the dafault user/group has changed from
root:wheel to opensips:opensips. This is better security practice.

After those changes have stabilised, I promise to make your suggested chang=
es.
For the time being, I can't see how the extra dependencies are a huge probl=
em.
They don't take up much space, or lots of compile time, and can be left unu=
sed
without any security repercussions.

--=20
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.=



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?bug-222718-13-dCRy8kahbr>