Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2003 09:53:02 +0000 From: Michal Pasternak <michal@pasternak.w.lub.pl> To: Joe Marcus Clarke <marcus@marcuscom.com>, Dirk Meyer <dirk.meyer@dinoex.sub.org>, ports@FreeBSD.org, portmgr@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD Port: sendmail-8.12.9 Message-ID: <20030919095302.GA23029@pasternak.w.lub.pl> In-Reply-To: <20030919091105.GU79731@freepuppy.bellavista.cz> References: <263A1F717ECDED40AA969F98D1CF122E0F7A5C@penxng.smca.yahoo.com> <h%2Bn%2BK4qHGQ@dmeyer.dinoex.sub.org> <1063912763.3815.83.camel@shumai.marcuscom.com> <20030919091105.GU79731@freepuppy.bellavista.cz>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Roman Neuhauser [Fri, Sep 19, 2003 at 11:11:05AM +0200]: > # marcus@marcuscom.com / 2003-09-18 15:19:24 -0400: > > On Thu, 2003-09-18 at 15:10, Dirk Meyer wrote: > > > Viner, David wrote: > > > > > > > Recently the 8.12.10 version of sendmail was released to patch a > > > > "critical security problem". Can you update the freebsd port of sendmail to > > > > the newer version? > > > > > > waiting for approval by portmgr@FreeBSD.org > > > > Approved. > > why hasn't the freeze been lifted? it surely looks pretty unfair Why do FreeBSD ports have to be "frozen"? I'd mark current ports tree as RELENG_5_2 tag and just let other people go with their patches to "current" ports. By branching ports you can still have "frozen" ports for a given release - and normal, usual port users will not be affected by any code freezes. -- Michal Pasternak :: http://pasternak.w.lub.pl Noise to meet you.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030919095302.GA23029>