From owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG  Mon Feb 16 22:28:08 2004
Return-Path: <owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id D11CA16A4CE; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 22:28:08 -0800 (PST)
Received: from blues.jpj.net (blues.jpj.net [208.210.80.156])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 8ED5D43D1D; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 22:28:08 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from trevor@jpj.net)
Received: from blues.jpj.net (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by blues.jpj.net (8.12.9p2/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i1H6STm3076952;
	Tue, 17 Feb 2004 01:28:29 -0500 (EST)
	(envelope-from trevor@jpj.net)
Received: from localhost (trevor@localhost)i1H6ST6n076949;
	Tue, 17 Feb 2004 01:28:29 -0500 (EST)
X-Authentication-Warning: blues.jpj.net: trevor owned process doing -bs
Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2004 01:28:29 -0500 (EST)
From: Trevor Johnson <trevor@jpj.net>
To: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org>
In-Reply-To: <20040217062011.GA9902@xor.obsecurity.org>
Message-ID: <20040217012529.U36419@blues.jpj.net>
References: <200402170536.i1H5avHr010411@repoman.freebsd.org>
	<20040217062011.GA9902@xor.obsecurity.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.39
cc: cvs-ports@FreeBSD.org
cc: Kris Kennaway <kris@FreeBSD.org>
cc: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org
cc: ports-committers@FreeBSD.org
Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/devel/boost Makefile
X-BeenThere: cvs-all@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: CVS commit messages for the entire tree <cvs-all.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-all>,
	<mailto:cvs-all-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/cvs-all>
List-Post: <mailto:cvs-all@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:cvs-all-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-all>,
	<mailto:cvs-all-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2004 06:28:09 -0000

> > Maybe BROKEN would be more suitable, unless the incorrect threading causes
> > a security problem?
>
> No, but it causes runtime problems for people who link against it with
> the default threads library, so BROKEN is inappropriate.

Marking it BROKEN would prevent users from installing it at all, unless
they edit out the BROKEN line--or is there something I'm missing?
-- 
Trevor Johnson