Date: Fri, 6 Oct 2023 13:41:23 +0200 From: Matthias Andree <mandree@FreeBSD.org> To: =?UTF-8?Q?Dag-Erling_Sm=c3=b8rgrav?= <des@des.no> Cc: ports-committers@FreeBSD.org, dev-commits-ports-all@FreeBSD.org, dev-commits-ports-main@FreeBSD.org, portmgr <portmgr@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: git: 6e968aff79f9 - main - mail/fetchmail: Remove unneeded CA_BUNDLE option. Message-ID: <ccef62fc-9a56-94e0-bd93-a89eed7c4048@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <864jj4f0c0.fsf@ltc.des.no> References: <202310060907.39697aDB059901@gitrepo.freebsd.org> <9c9d97ee-b835-b889-9870-0dcfebecab6a@FreeBSD.org> <864jj4f0c0.fsf@ltc.des.no>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Am 06.10.23 um 13:37 schrieb Dag-Erling Smørgrav: >> 2. explain why it was not sufficient to just remove CA_BUNDLE from >> OPTIONS_DEFAULT, and how we make sure that the default trust anchors >> are still present. > > The option is useless, we've shipped ca_root_nss in base for the last > three years. Thank you. Should we add a paragraph to ports/CHANGES mentioning that new ports should not add this because <see your reason>? We should mention this so it does not get reintroduced because $PAST_PRACTICE. Could you do this additional effort? You seem to have been in touch with many more people on this matter so I would not want to add this myself whilst unaware of your experience. TIA. -- Matthias Andree FreeBSD ports committer
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?ccef62fc-9a56-94e0-bd93-a89eed7c4048>