On 09/05/2011 02:33, Julian H. Stacey wrote:
> Chris Rees wrote:
>> On 4 September 2011 21:32, Julian H. Stacey <j...@berklix.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Whoops, also missed a CVE -- buffer overflows can cause a DoS.
>>>> Expiration date altered to 1 month accordingly.
>>>
>>> It is not responsible to threaten to remove ports without warning
>>> between releases for non urgent reasons.
We understand that this is your perspective, however the community in
general has a different idea.
>>> Better to deprecate such non urgent ports, & wait a while after next
>>> release is rolled, to give release users a warning & some time
>>> to volunteer (or if a firm using releases, perhaps time to allocate
>>> a staff member if a port is important to them).
That's an interesting idea, but incredibly unlikely to happen.
>> Yeah... perhaps if there isn't a vulnerability. At the moment it's
>> marked FORBIDDEN,
>
> Correction:
> "At the moment" all those with 8.2-RELEASE/ports still see no FORBIDDEN,
That's what portaudit is for.
> The Attic is the standard myopic excuse, ignoring not all FreeBSD
> release users have CVS,
It is available to everyone, and trivial to configure. The fact that
removed ports still exist in CVS is not a "myopic excuse," it's a fact.
We need to make the best decisions we can to provide the best support
possible for the largest percentage of our users.
--
Nothin' ever doesn't change, but nothin' changes much.
-- OK Go
Breadth of IT experience, and depth of knowledge in the DNS.
Yours for the right price. :) http://SupersetSolutions.com/
_______________________________________________
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
