Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2012 11:07:34 +0400 From: Ruslan Mahmatkhanov <cvs-src@yandex.ru> To: Thomas-Martin Seck <tmseck@web.de> Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Quick status update on Squid 3.x ports Message-ID: <5063FB36.8080906@yandex.ru> In-Reply-To: <20120927052202.GA2077@wcfields.tmseck.homedns.org> References: <20120927052202.GA2077@wcfields.tmseck.homedns.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi Thomas,
Thomas-Martin Seck wrote on 27.09.2012 09:22:
> Hi,
>
> this is just a short update on the status of Squid 3 ports. As you may
> have noticed I am a bit behind with regards to Squid 3.2. Sorry for that
> -- I could not spend much time for ports development in the last few
> months. To add insult to injury I will be offline for the next couple of
> days but I plan to have the 3.2 port ready in the week starting Oct 7
> nonetheless.
>
> I just submitted an update request for 3.1 to 3.1.21 for the time being.
>
> On a side note: in the past, the default Squid port was named
> www/squid and the older or development Squid versions had versioned port
> directory names. Should we move www/squid to www/squid27 instead and
> make all Squid dependend ports that currently depend on www/squid use
> www/squid27 instead?
>
> Best regards
First thank you for working on this. According to squid web-page, 3.2 is
the only stable version ("Current versions suitable for production
use."), that is actively maintained. 3.1 and less are listed in "Old
versions - Provided for archival purposes only. Not intended for general
use in new installations". Is there still 2.7 users?! As for me, 3.2
should go to www/squid and some kind of exp-run should be done to make
sure the ports depending on it builds fine.
--
Regards,
Ruslan
Tinderboxing kills... the drives.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?5063FB36.8080906>