From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG  Sun Jun 13 13:45:36 2004
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0E40B16A4CE
	for <FreeBSD-ports@FreeBSD.org>; Sun, 13 Jun 2004 13:45:36 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from web50301.mail.yahoo.com (web50301.mail.yahoo.com
	[206.190.38.55])	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 9327C43D54
	for <FreeBSD-ports@FreeBSD.org>;
	Sun, 13 Jun 2004 13:45:35 +0000 (GMT)	(envelope-from cykyc@yahoo.com)
Message-ID: <20040613134426.91585.qmail@web50301.mail.yahoo.com>
Received: from [209.98.54.121] by web50301.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP;
	Sun, 13 Jun 2004 06:44:26 PDT
Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2004 06:44:26 -0700 (PDT)
From: Jon Passki <cykyc@yahoo.com>
To: FreeBSD ports <FreeBSD-ports@FreeBSD.org>
In-Reply-To: <41764F4F-BD1A-11D8-B633-00039312D914@fillmore-labs.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Subject: Re: FYI: new port security/portaudit-db
X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
Reply-To: cykyc@yahoo.com
List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD <freebsd-ports.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports>,
	<mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports>,
	<mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2004 13:45:36 -0000


--- Oliver Eikemeier <eikemeier@fillmore-labs.com> wrote:
> Dear porters and port users,
<snip about new port>

> I take this announcement as an opportunity to make a plea to all
> port 
> maintainers:
> 
> * please stick with *one* PKGNAMESUFFIX (possibly using a
> combined one 
> like -sasl-client)
> 
> * please *do not* change the structure of the packages version
> number 
> according to included components.
> 
> Lets take for example port `myport' with has optional components
> c1 and 
> c2. This *should not*
> result in the following package names:
> 
>    port-v
>    port-suf1-v+v1
>    port-suf2-v+v2
>    port-suf1-suf2-v+v1+v2
> 
> because I need 2^(number of components) entries to catch all
> possible 
> combinations, for example the
> recent vulnerability in www/apache13-modssl would need 32 entries
> in the 
> vulnerability database,
> which seems a little high. A net effect is that many combinations
> are 
> not recognized, and users remain
> unprotected even though they assume the opposite. If you need to
> record 
> the included components, please
> do this in the pkg-message, which is displayed with pkg_info -D.
> 
> Again:
> 
> * a port should *not* change its version numbering based on
> included 
> components
> 
> * restrain yourself to *one* suffix in the package name (and use
> a dash 
> to seperate it from the main ports name)

No bikeshed here, just pointing out that if you go this route then
change the porters-handbook.  Chapter 5.2.4 allows what you wish to
avoid.

Jon




	
		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Friends.  Fun.  Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
http://messenger.yahoo.com/