From owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG  Sun Aug 15 17:39:54 2004
Return-Path: <owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 621F916A4CE; Sun, 15 Aug 2004 17:39:54 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from fillmore.dyndns.org (port-212-202-50-15.dynamic.qsc.de
	[212.202.50.15])	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 286AD43D1D; Sun, 15 Aug 2004 17:39:54 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from eikemeier@fillmore-labs.com)
Received: from dhcp-11.local ([172.16.0.11] helo=dhcp-13.local)
	by fillmore.dyndns.org with esmtp (TLSv1:DES-CBC3-SHA:168)
	(Exim 4.41 (FreeBSD))
	id 1BwOz1-000Guy-6f; Sun, 15 Aug 2004 19:39:53 +0200
Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 19:41:34 +0200
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v482)
To: "Jacques A. Vidrine" <nectar@FreeBSD.org>
From: Oliver Eikemeier <eikemeier@fillmore-labs.com>
In-Reply-To: <20040815162939.GB3559@lum.celabo.org>
Message-Id: <59A4C7E0-EEE2-11D8-87C4-00039312D914@fillmore-labs.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
User-Agent: KMail/1.5.9
cc: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org
Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/security/portaudit-db/database portaudit.txt
	portaudit.xlist portaudit.xml
X-BeenThere: cvs-all@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: CVS commit messages for the entire tree <cvs-all.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-all>,
	<mailto:cvs-all-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/cvs-all>
List-Post: <mailto:cvs-all@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:cvs-all-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-all>,
	<mailto:cvs-all-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 17:39:54 -0000

Jacques A. Vidrine wrote:

> The commit message seems to be incomplete.  The 670% increase in
> portaudit.xml seems to be largely a number of entries that are also in
> ports/security/vuxml/vuln.xml, although the text and references seem to
> be rewritten in most (all?) cases and different UUIDs have been
> assigned.

Yup, they use the UUIDs they had assigned in portaudit, before they have 
been re-added with different UUIDs to vuxml.

> I'm not sure what portaudit.xml is for, but it seems a bit confusing to
> have some issues described differently in two different locations.  
> Maybe
> you could clue me in as to what is going on?  Seems like we need to
> normalize this data.

Those entries are tested and work with portaudit. It seems like vuxml 
has different requirements.

-Oliver