Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 18 Oct 2017 23:47:50 +0000
From:      bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org
To:        freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   [Bug 223099] security/boringssl: conflicts with other ssl ports
Message-ID:  <bug-223099-13@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>

next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D223099

            Bug ID: 223099
           Summary: security/boringssl: conflicts with other ssl ports
           Product: Ports & Packages
           Version: Latest
          Hardware: Any
                OS: Any
            Status: New
          Severity: Affects Some People
          Priority: ---
         Component: Individual Port(s)
          Assignee: swills@FreeBSD.org
          Reporter: z7dr6ut7gs@snkmail.com
          Assignee: swills@FreeBSD.org
             Flags: maintainer-feedback?(swills@FreeBSD.org)

Should this port be marked to CONFLICT with openssl, etc.?

Or is it sufficient to rely on pkg(8) to detect conflict when the package
install is attempted.  The downside for that would be that users don't get
presented with the conflict until after build + stage.  Maybe that's okay -
that policy would avoid the manual management of CONFLICTS* settings.

--=20
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.=



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?bug-223099-13>