Make.conf and DEFAULT_VERSIONS

2022-07-18 Thread @lbutlr
Is there a list of what should and should not be listed in the make.conf file for DEFAULT VERSIONS? For example, I run bind on my system, but some ports install unbound, is there a DEFAULTS_VERSION for bind or named? Unbound is currently installed but not running. But what about other packages

Re: Mariabackup core dump

2022-03-19 Thread @lbutlr
On 2021 Apr 20, at 13:06, @lbutlr wrote: > On 20 Apr 2021, at 11:34, Kurt Jaeger wrote: >> >>> <https://jira.mariadb.org/browse/MDEV-15996> >>> >>> This was posted 3 years ago, and I am having the identical issue. From what >>> I can see on

Lost failing with many issues

2021-10-20 Thread @lbutlr
When trying to make lsof from sysutils/lsof in the ports tree, after a `make clean; make` on 13.0-RELEASE-p4 FreeBSD 13.0-RELEASE-p4 i386 I get: --- dmnt.o --- In file included from dmnt.c:38: --- dnode.o --- In file included from dnode.c:38: In file included from ./lsof.h:250: In file included f

Re: Gitup core dump

2021-08-18 Thread @lbutlr
On 2021 Aug 16, at 13:22, Herbert J. Skuhra wrote: > On Mon, Aug 16, 2021 at 12:14:07PM -0600, @lbutlr wrote: >> After not getting any updated packages, I checked the logs and then manually >> ran gitup: >> >> # gitup ports >> # Scanning local repository... >

Gitup core dump

2021-08-16 Thread @lbutlr
After not getting any updated packages, I checked the logs and then manually ran gitup: # gitup ports # Scanning local repository... # Host: github.com # Port: 443 # Repository Path: /freebsd/freebsd-ports.git # Target Directory: /usr/ports # Commit History: yes # Have: 108bd05cd72b450b9eac8734dc

gnutls requires unbound?

2021-07-13 Thread @lbutlr
When updating gnutls, the port requires and installs unbound. This is despitee the fact that bind is already installed why is a second DNS server required for gnutls? Unbound is not running on the system (nor could it be, since the DNS ports are bound to bind). I am still occasionally getting t

Re: Dovecot

2021-07-02 Thread @lbutlr
> On 02 Jul 2021, at 00:03, Kevin Oberman wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 1, 2021 at 4:00 PM @lbutlr wrote: > >> On 01 Jul 2021, at 16:45, The Doctor wrote: >>> On Thu, Jul 01, 2021 at 04:21:31PM -0600, @lbutlr wrote: >>>> The current version of dovecot

Re: Dovecot

2021-07-01 Thread @lbutlr
On 01 Jul 2021, at 16:45, The Doctor wrote: > On Thu, Jul 01, 2021 at 04:21:31PM -0600, @lbutlr wrote: >> The current version of dovecot is 2.3.15. The newest ports version is >> 2.3.13_1 >> >> dovecot-2.3.13_1 is vulnerable: >> dovecot -- multiple vulner

Dovecot

2021-07-01 Thread @lbutlr
The current version of dovecot is 2.3.15. The newest ports version is 2.3.13_1 dovecot-2.3.13_1 is vulnerable: dovecot -- multiple vulnerabilities CVE: CVE-2021-33515 CVE: CVE-2021-29157 WWW: https://vuxml.FreeBSD.org/freebsd/d18f431d-d360-11eb-a32c-00a0989e4ec1.html dovecot-pigeonhole-