From owner-freebsd-ports  Wed Aug 16  1:30: 5 2000
Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
Received: from axl.ops.uunet.co.za (axl.ops.uunet.co.za [196.31.2.163])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id AACE637BE3D; Wed, 16 Aug 2000 01:29:49 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from sheldonh@axl.ops.uunet.co.za)
Received: from sheldonh (helo=axl.ops.uunet.co.za)
	by axl.ops.uunet.co.za with local-esmtp (Exim 3.16 #1)
	id 13Oya1-0003ty-00; Wed, 16 Aug 2000 10:29:45 +0200
From: Sheldon Hearn <sheldonh@uunet.co.za>
To: Kris Kennaway <kris@FreeBSD.ORG>
Cc: security@FreeBSD.ORG, ports@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: Hilighting dangerous ports 
In-reply-to: Your message of "Wed, 16 Aug 2000 01:02:16 MST."
             <Pine.BSF.4.21.0008160054520.88623-100000@freefall.freebsd.org> 
Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 10:29:45 +0200
Message-ID: <15001.966414585@axl.ops.uunet.co.za>
Sender: owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org



On Wed, 16 Aug 2000 01:02:16 MST, Kris Kennaway wrote:

> What does everyone think of the attached patch to bsd.port.mk, which
> hilights potentially insecure files installed by a port at install-time?

I like the idea.  It would be even more of an improvement over the
status quo if a solution for packages could be found.  Many folks use
packages only and many more use packages mostly. :-)

Ciao,
Sheldon.


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message