From nobody Fri Dec 27 14:54:26 2024 X-Original-To: freebsd-current@mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4YKT6d21sXz5hdBs for ; Fri, 27 Dec 2024 14:54:33 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bapt@freebsd.org) Received: from smtp.freebsd.org (smtp.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::24b:4]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256 client-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "smtp.freebsd.org", Issuer "R10" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4YKT6d1Nkbz4fp2; Fri, 27 Dec 2024 14:54:33 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bapt@freebsd.org) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=freebsd.org; s=dkim; t=1735311273; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=6fYtmMe9XXs8h1MKNLUQmOGOZYv73fk1E2DFTK22xO8=; b=X6HLmy3cM5Xt9tU4kG5i3Q3eUJPRmZsnvz3nFg5g4zuznXupZjSuIeMEql2vNrfk9+AWRy h/+kwbcJA6jRL8ji6soEqhRC9Wg6C6e7yfodGjvdqliURtwPAjOnMIqNMtLhZqK+2QQp2W rB6YVhvBlX0spfdq/YiIe60by2JgG7NhcaCW00IBjUQ5h5ZL7xq4H2SYTz58hvPOXpgOTG SSrHNOlpRo+Nm6cU1yJverU0oL0dD5VfeB9ovP/OMcsSolmk7pT9gxfypa13dSwyaq/HcT IlV2qRgETgyd2QMtizBnkg8Z0HEWvFUW+zv0NE3bVHBN67y8H8FxtYNkzi78Bg== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=freebsd.org; s=dkim; t=1735311273; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=6fYtmMe9XXs8h1MKNLUQmOGOZYv73fk1E2DFTK22xO8=; b=BKSLPf2IoVAeAlgBewQ//6Ctfm1AsCWrqmPrQDxv3qcYq4SlMSttnWc0UY/k+JiLTxQS1w MDHMntUtF+BiEM5pu2iy05qR4svc5lhy9ZCTympWTNK2UItqbcNF8SVW3DIcMojVj89k7m p41qUJePHZgYabvC9pIAboaPbfQL7PN4ZtZfYZgwaCkkrQVNSTWWm37l67JSi5+lSkYyJl ZgRWyaucGqASCd7ATbRKYT2FgNHg1dYxJizP4Zh1nOF89wD6NQqf52L4Qn1iQuKSxkfUSj yrrYP1tjlsNINftR3fohrb/yeMJRdtIEGzlDs8dmTfcUQqvKpV+VlTWCWIccPQ== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx1.freebsd.org; none ARC-Seal: i=1; s=dkim; d=freebsd.org; t=1735311273; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=Uw8EXmMg3G8TpyZ0VqPf3haEeLKsDVqYG2KDhx2ziHt3sagVec2nTrKr4+k990Xuj9U39h 4r3jHyQUFfWe9FSg/K8RDaF7f2bbs95uAIkqpCsafM53w7WqO3shAzX+AWZW/JCJtgpoCa gzjdzRFDvOLj0oRK1+pKSROtj5azAHHxQ+f4hib+jaWBRWZ1Bq52djA0m29FeatkIS4Ns0 dhAAcfT6vjUMT8ulrGRMPcWYSNNrke7VgzJQZzS30Mzgga1Cdlbrkxh3/yb02l5QbStc7s UTsWvDqxrr9s2VHUTeD1wF7vPJIn/dmibkzaZXcZOrspmaFDa8u4tpiPzE+ong== Received: from aniel.nours.eu (nours.eu [IPv6:2001:41d0:8:3a4d::1]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (Client did not present a certificate) (Authenticated sender: bapt) by smtp.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4YKT6d0Hl8zhKb; Fri, 27 Dec 2024 14:54:33 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bapt@freebsd.org) Received: by aniel.nours.eu (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 93EED1527BB; Fri, 27 Dec 2024 15:54:26 +0100 (CET) Date: Fri, 27 Dec 2024 15:54:26 +0100 From: Baptiste Daroussin To: Nuno Teixeira Cc: FreeBSD CURRENT Subject: Re: base64.h problems with rtorent port Message-ID: References: List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Archive: https://lists.freebsd.org/archives/freebsd-current List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: On Fri 27 Dec 14:24, Nuno Teixeira wrote: > Perfect! > > I'm thinking using a radio option where we can select one of xml parsers or > none as supported upstream, defaulting to TINYXML. > > A quick look in repology shows that at least 3 linux distros use directly > `--with-xmlrpc-tinyxml2` with 0.15.0 pkgs. I'm ok with simplifying port or > keep radio option. > > Cheers! My understanding is users have no idea what the difference is, upstream recommands their new xmlrpc implementation, we probably only provide this implementation and if we have reports of issues without, switch back to the xmlrpc-c based one until upstream fixes the issue. Which means in the end drop entirely the option ;) Best regards, Bapt