Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 21 Oct 2009 15:53:15 +0000
From:      Paul Schmehl <pschmehl_lists@tx.rr.com>
To:        Bill Moran <wmoran@potentialtech.com>
Cc:        FreeBSD Ports <freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: Need advice from maintainers
Message-ID:  <65DDA3431A3A3C82B20A2039@utd65257.utdallas.edu>
In-Reply-To: <20091021113121.fcdb99f5.wmoran@potentialtech.com>
References:  <D5F34484F338143BEE6437C3@utd65257.utdallas.edu> <20091021113121.fcdb99f5.wmoran@potentialtech.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--On Wednesday, October 21, 2009 10:31:21 -0500 Bill Moran 
<wmoran@potentialtech.com> wrote:

>
> In response to Paul Schmehl <pschmehl_lists@tx.rr.com>:
>
>> I am the maintainer for security/barnyard2.  This is an updated version of
>> security/barnyard, which I also maintain.  The version of my port is the
>> current release version, but it has a really irritating problem that is fixed
>> in the current beta version.
>>
>> Barnyard2 is a program that parses snort logs and inserts them into a
>> database (mysql or postgresql).  It is supposed to create a placemarker file
>> (called a waldo file) that maintains a record of what logs it has already
>> parsed.  (This is only one way of using the program.  There are others as
>> well.)  The problem in the release version is that it does not read the
>> waldo file when the program is restarted.  So every time you restart
>> barnyard2, it reinserts into the database every alert you still have log
>> files for.  The beta version fixes this problem.
>>
>> I have created a port for the beta version and am using it myself, but I know
>> that using beta versions of software is frowned upon.  Should I go ahead and
>> submit this port because it solves this problem?
>>
>> If I do, my thinking is that I should adjust the pkg-message file in the
>> existing port to warn the user about the problem and note that the beta
>> version solves it so they might want to consider using that instead.
>
> An option that you did not mention is to take the patch that fixes that
> single problem and include as a patch file for barnyard2.  That way it's
> not a true beta, it just has that single patch to fix a known problem.
>
> For me, I think that would be the preferred method in this case.
>

I *might* be able to do that, if I can figure out where in the code the problem 
is fixed.  I've had two semesters of C++, but I am not a programmer and 
consider myself the rankest of novices wrt code.

-- 
Paul Schmehl, Senior Infosec Analyst
As if it wasn't already obvious, my opinions
are my own and not those of my employer.
*******************************************
"It is as useless to argue with those who have
renounced the use of reason as to administer
medication to the dead." Thomas Jefferson




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?65DDA3431A3A3C82B20A2039>