From owner-freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD.ORG Sun May 22 16:00:24 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports-bugs@hub.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 836431065670 for ; Sun, 22 May 2011 16:00:24 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::28]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 743228FC12 for ; Sun, 22 May 2011 16:00:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id p4MG0OUL065353 for ; Sun, 22 May 2011 16:00:24 GMT (envelope-from gnats@freefall.freebsd.org) Received: (from gnats@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.14.4/8.14.4/Submit) id p4MG0Od4065352; Sun, 22 May 2011 16:00:24 GMT (envelope-from gnats) Date: Sun, 22 May 2011 16:00:24 GMT Message-Id: <201105221600.p4MG0Od4065352@freefall.freebsd.org> To: freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD.org From: "Helmut Schneider" Cc: Subject: Re: ports/156988: net-mgmt/nagios: Please add IPv6 support X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports-bugs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: Helmut Schneider List-Id: Ports bug reports List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 22 May 2011 16:00:24 -0000 The following reply was made to PR ports/156988; it has been noted by GNATS. From: "Helmut Schneider" To: "Jarrod Sayers" , Cc: Subject: Re: ports/156988: net-mgmt/nagios: Please add IPv6 support Date: Sun, 22 May 2011 17:52:20 +0200 Hi, From: "Helmut Schneider" > From: "Jarrod Sayers" > >> Requests of this nature should be directed towards the development team. >> If an official patch is released by this team that delivers the required >> feature, >> I would be more than happy to support its addition. > > While I changed the patch to the attached version which works fine with > 3.2.3 on 8.2-RELEASE I also asked the nagios-devel mailing list about the > current status. I'll keep you posted. OK, one of the answers I recieved was http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/message.php?msg_id=27533068 and personally I now think that using $HOSTNAME$ instead $HOSTADDRESS$ and adding -4/-6 to the commands makes the IPv6 patch needless. Cheers, Helmut