Date: Sat, 29 Apr 2000 20:23:11 -0500 From: Ade Lovett <ade@FreeBSD.org> To: Bill Fenner <fenner@research.att.com> Cc: ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: comms/hylafax Message-ID: <20000429202311.F67170@lovett.com> In-Reply-To: <200004292304.QAA02196@windsor.research.att.com>; from fenner@research.att.com on Sat, Apr 29, 2000 at 04:04:24PM -0700 References: <200004292304.QAA02196@windsor.research.att.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, Apr 29, 2000 at 04:04:24PM -0700, Bill Fenner wrote:
>
> AFAIK, hylafax is still the most full-featured FAX server available
> for UNIX.
Definitely.
> People in a trusted firewalled environment, for example, have
> much less to worry about with respect to the security holes that exist.
My point in starting this thread, with the 'threat' of removing
comms/hylafax, is that it has two current problems:
1. a known security hole (regardless of the severity in
trusted environments, it's still a hole), that has not
been address in quite some time.
2. no current MAINTAINER
(2) is more problematical, especially in terms of (1).
One of the problems when adding so many new ports on a seemingly
constant basis is ensuring that "bit-rot" is kept to a minimum,
and ports that fit into categories (1) and (2) should, imo,
be first up against the wall.
Now, it appears that we've stirred up a little interest in perhaps
getting the port operational again. This is good. I don't take
to saying "kill this port" lightly.
The first step would be for one of the interested parties here
to step up to the plate and take MAINTAINERship.
Any takers?
-aDe
--
Ade Lovett, Austin, TX.
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20000429202311.F67170>