From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG  Tue Nov 27 12:18:49 2012
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52])
 by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EDBF91D3
 for <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>; Tue, 27 Nov 2012 12:18:49 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from tevans.uk@googlemail.com)
Received: from mail-vb0-f54.google.com (mail-vb0-f54.google.com
 [209.85.212.54])
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9E2CD8FC14
 for <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>; Tue, 27 Nov 2012 12:18:49 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-vb0-f54.google.com with SMTP id l1so5033784vba.13
 for <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>; Tue, 27 Nov 2012 04:18:48 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
 h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
 :cc:content-type;
 bh=UF8k+mCCcwfGsqvgS1tWHA+g8ntbc2EgQu8nHErVog4=;
 b=rcJFOkydf/ZtUYQRwVPCQeO+NV+n2Wt0xoNJzHjBJQAqApjsoVg8FOplnqQDiB30uN
 98ajmXIdQsDzLcXoDW56N4xwtdxSPBasp76rXjPpWzKrHbd9B0ppW7Zj3NsWUQ2iO58e
 hRzLAFOCbSEMVkXjjCHC0ih/FGkCLhqRjgYJkCRcl0BXkMsAqkIIisrPkFW3Ei5LsPhD
 wCJNUuJ+bVU16s0HIb54im9hNs4b2ACWpM+DPJI1sdeF0CSjiKV02NHVlKWxdeT+hHta
 AXPAUxtVKTJiVmCTUJkys4xlG5NXdTglFHpK2vpLiTDtJ6CcpsB4G2AhAzhm77bO0Kx/
 oQVA==
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.52.100.65 with SMTP id ew1mr20693168vdb.125.1354018728924;
 Tue, 27 Nov 2012 04:18:48 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.58.233.39 with HTTP; Tue, 27 Nov 2012 04:18:48 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <CAKoxK+4KsdMRj2YYPGvSFZTiuQXOeP2+9ArkC2gCLVb5DFCb1g@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAKoxK+5iy2R7=cZp38xKZpTbgFd0aZ3H28tVmPnuPR01w=pO4A@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAPJF9wnoTCjNM76M-=DdC85P75niKH+ta0Vk8X7HORGvT=LLcQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAKoxK+5yrsfnMQG5LnJ2+FWMH6PDcWmZhKVrKpxkutHpb=MdNA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAKoxK+5qivgzMzkOQo7JYOQGAKwyWAf8xfUUR=g5SvpguM2W7Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAKoxK+4KsdMRj2YYPGvSFZTiuQXOeP2+9ArkC2gCLVb5DFCb1g@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2012 12:18:48 +0000
Message-ID: <CAFHbX1+wya7SCq1Z2niM14D=8zFBz=rmof_B7Yj15qn-BS3vkw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: simple patch for portsnap to use wget
From: Tom Evans <tevans.uk@googlemail.com>
To: Luca Ferrari <fluca1978@infinito.it>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14
Precedence: list
List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code <freebsd-stable.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-stable>,
 <mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-stable>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable>,
 <mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2012 12:18:50 -0000

On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 12:16 PM, Luca Ferrari <fluca1978@infinito.it> wrote:
> I did a little review and now it is possible to specify to use wget or
> not using the portsnap.conf file, as well as the option to ingore
> certificate checking even if I don't believe this is correct.
> Therefore portsnap with this patch could work with either wget or
> phttpget, even if I'm not able to test if the laminating is still
> correct for phttpget (someone could test please?).
>

Why wget and not fetch(1)?

Cheers

Tom