From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG  Tue Aug 30 08:37:50 2011
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 60F3C1065676;
	Tue, 30 Aug 2011 08:37:50 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from delphij@delphij.net)
Received: from anubis.delphij.net (anubis.delphij.net
	[IPv6:2001:470:1:117::25])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 443B28FC17;
	Tue, 30 Aug 2011 08:37:50 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from delta.delphij.net (c-76-102-50-245.hsd1.ca.comcast.net
	[76.102.50.245])
	(using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	by anubis.delphij.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C0807F371;
	Tue, 30 Aug 2011 01:37:48 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=delphij.net; s=anubis;
	t=1314693470; bh=k2qAPIxoRLSuikIO2c5J/NJNgW1PkGGIgvzqhm6UyjA=;
	h=Message-ID:Date:From:Reply-To:MIME-Version:To:CC:Subject:
	References:In-Reply-To:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding;
	b=hXVE8LFnjiWNvPawMqZIrA2iOTIq/oMXCpLBh0ZDDdd3LFvYQ3qjFuvtnWsdL8WuZ
	A/soKi+D8jCAVe8zyGRQLwXr6M8IpgGBeivkxFtqy3tC2vHPj7qkyGVNMCq9JEyl2r
	WMlMnJ4MExvKNnS/eTRmUacYnazdzHm03Ann272Y=
Message-ID: <4E5CA159.4010404@delphij.net>
Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2011 01:37:45 -0700
From: Xin LI <delphij@delphij.net>
Organization: The FreeBSD Project
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Doug Barton <dougb@FreeBSD.org>
References: <4E5C79AF.6000408@FreeBSD.org> <20110830062541.GA5538@lonesome.com>
	<4E5C9C8A.1010105@FreeBSD.org>
In-Reply-To: <4E5C9C8A.1010105@FreeBSD.org>
OpenPGP: id=3FCA37C1;
	url=http://www.delphij.net/delphij.asc
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: Mark Linimon <linimon@lonesome.com>,
	"freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.org" <freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.org>,
	secteam@FreeBSD.org
Subject: Re: Why do we not mark vulnerable ports DEPRECATED?
X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
Reply-To: d@delphij.net
List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD <freebsd-ports.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports>,
	<mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports>,
	<mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2011 08:37:50 -0000

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

On 08/30/11 01:17, Doug Barton wrote:
> On 08/29/2011 23:25, Mark Linimon wrote:
>> So, the right answer may be "it depends".
> 
> I think my point is, it shouldn't. If a port is important/popular
> than it will be quickly fixed. If not, it goes away. Everyone
> wins.

Personally I do support this idea.

By the way vuxml is essentially a BROKEN if portaudit is installed.
Perhaps we should have that in base system or the build cluster?

Cheers,
- -- 
Xin LI <delphij@delphij.net>	https://www.delphij.net/
FreeBSD - The Power to Serve!		Live free or die
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.18 (FreeBSD)

iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJOXKFYAAoJEATO+BI/yjfBwkYH/2hDRqHEHztCDybJ4pE6u682
tURpASOWJgxkFn0xT1GF0VL9iwULWbboPdKVhWWPKAZiOWezJbepPeQv4Lcvbqqs
GB28I6DPyRIDES1eqAVJ9RbjP8LgUCTMBu2LU8YCkB1Zrbg9fXD5I0amEXaDTVoc
vBPM2uiWjx49/vgBRjSYKo2KG4MxOAt0PS+SlxXD5eeNodJmMLq8ipL6nA0ptA03
/l8ymf5wbNIWTmBm98CY1bIzxtVb1zcvkHPZRe4fPPXCFElrh6qCou09XJxoWg3P
sTaf6kIpCxTcPsKCdAipo5OvcnXh66Kn4hlKpvc3mKwYr5jMN69d9KqSaLw0HM4=
=02aU
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----