From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Jan 29 15:03:12 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 91DDA16A4CE for ; Sat, 29 Jan 2005 15:03:12 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mail28.sea5.speakeasy.net (mail28.sea5.speakeasy.net [69.17.117.30]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 61B1043D3F for ; Sat, 29 Jan 2005 15:03:12 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from freebsd-questions-local@be-well.ilk.org) Received: (qmail 11012 invoked from network); 29 Jan 2005 15:03:11 -0000 Received: from dsl092-078-145.bos1.dsl.speakeasy.net (HELO be-well.ilk.org) ([66.92.78.145]) (envelope-sender ) by mail28.sea5.speakeasy.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP for ; 29 Jan 2005 15:03:11 -0000 Received: by be-well.ilk.org (Postfix, from userid 1147) id CA02884; Sat, 29 Jan 2005 10:03:08 -0500 (EST) Sender: lowell@be-well.ilk.org To: Juha Saarinen References: From: Lowell Gilbert Date: 29 Jan 2005 10:03:08 -0500 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <44ekg41dn7.fsf@be-well.ilk.org> Lines: 21 User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.3 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii cc: tmseck@netcologne.de cc: FreeBSD Questions Subject: Re: Squid 2.5.7_8 -> 2.5.7_9 portupgrade fails X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list Reply-To: FreeBSD Questions List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 15:03:12 -0000 Juha Saarinen writes: > Trying to update Squid, as portaudit complains about the existing > version, but not having much success despite make clean and refetching > the sources: > > ===> Applying distribution patches for squid-2.5.7_9 > ===> Applying extra patch /usr/ports/www/squid/files/follow_xff-2.5.patch > 1 out of 5 hunks failed--saving rejects to src/structs.h.rej > *** Error code 1 Yep; that patch looks broken. > OPTIONS= ... > SQUID_FOLLOW_XFF "Follow X-Forwarded-For headers" off \ > ... > > Why is the patch being applied nevertheless? By default, it isn't being applied for me. Try "make rmconfig clean" and try again.