From owner-freebsd-ports Sun Jun 11 9:48:58 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from granger.mail.mindspring.net (granger.mail.mindspring.net [207.69.200.148]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B25EB37B9FC for ; Sun, 11 Jun 2000 09:48:55 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from john@zoner.org) Received: from tag1288.zoner.org ([209.138.225.180]) by granger.mail.mindspring.net (8.9.3/8.8.5) with ESMTP id MAB31721; Sun, 11 Jun 2000 12:48:41 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <4.3.1.0.20000611115343.00b0d720@pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: sniper@mail175.pair.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1 Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2000 12:48:34 -0400 To: Andy Sparrow From: John Holland Subject: Re: Hylafax security audit Cc: freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: <200006100210.TAA84367@mega.geek4food.org> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org At 07:10 PM 6/9/2000 -0700, Andy Sparrow wrote: >(4.1 mostly because of the libtiff interfaces incompatibility >issues with libtiff-3.5/hylafax-4.0. The patch to fix this is against >4.1 and doesn't apply cleanly to 4.0) > >Unfortunately, I do have other interests and things to do generally, >not to mention that hylafax 4.0 works great for me on 3.4-STABLE once I >sussed the libtiff issue and built it against a tiff-3.4 lib, so this >is kind of a "be nice to do" priority. In your opinion, would it be better/quicker to modify the libtiff interface calls to conform to libtiff-3.5.5 or to add a port for tiff-3.4 which links against libtiff34.so Do you have a patch for your modifications to hylafax 4.0 linked against tiff-3.4 lib? To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message