From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Jul 6 19:43:14 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8089A44D; Sun, 6 Jul 2014 19:43:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mailrelay008.isp.belgacom.be (mailrelay008.isp.belgacom.be [195.238.6.174]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 00FFF2ECB; Sun, 6 Jul 2014 19:43:11 +0000 (UTC) X-Belgacom-Dynamic: yes X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AmMGAN2luVNbsUTR/2dsb2JhbABaFoJ4Uk2+eoc/AYELF3WEAwEBAQQBAjccIxALDgoJJQ8ZER4GiFkBCMljF48iB4RDAQSYCoJrgUmSRINFOy8 Received: from 209.68-177-91.adsl-dyn.isp.belgacom.be (HELO kalimero.tijl.coosemans.org) ([91.177.68.209]) by relay.skynet.be with ESMTP; 06 Jul 2014 21:43:09 +0200 Received: from kalimero.tijl.coosemans.org (kalimero.tijl.coosemans.org [127.0.0.1]) by kalimero.tijl.coosemans.org (8.14.9/8.14.9) with ESMTP id s66Jh85Z005876; Sun, 6 Jul 2014 21:43:08 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from tijl@FreeBSD.org) Date: Sun, 6 Jul 2014 21:43:08 +0200 From: Tijl Coosemans To: Kurt Jaeger Subject: Re: upgrade to security/libgcrypt, shared lib bump, what needs to be done ? Message-ID: <20140706214308.7156373d@kalimero.tijl.coosemans.org> In-Reply-To: <20140706192720.GD73593@f10.opsec.eu> References: <20140706111643.GB73593@f10.opsec.eu> <20140706145604.0483ae7f@kalimero.tijl.coosemans.org> <20140706174859.GC73593@f10.opsec.eu> <20140706205203.4176600e@kalimero.tijl.coosemans.org> <20140706205623.2288c2d5@kalimero.tijl.coosemans.org> <20140706192720.GD73593@f10.opsec.eu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: ports@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 06 Jul 2014 19:43:14 -0000 On Sun, 6 Jul 2014 21:27:20 +0200 Kurt Jaeger wrote: >> On Sun, 6 Jul 2014 20:52:03 +0200 Tijl Coosemans wrote: >>> On Sun, 6 Jul 2014 19:48:59 +0200 Kurt Jaeger wrote: >>>> I prepared a new diff, see >>>> >>>> http://people.freebsd.org/~pi/misc/libgcrypt.svndiff-v2 >>>> >>>> Can you have a look at it, before I mess up the whole tree 8-} ? >>> >>> net/samba4/Makefile: PORTREVISION messed up >>> net/samba41/Makefile: PORTREVISION messed up > > Ah, thanks, fixed. > >>> security/libgcrypt/Makefile: Keep post-patch silent maybe? > > If possible, I would like to keep those post-patch changes in the open. > >>> Looks good otherwise, so go ahead and commit >> >> There's no major incompatibility with the old version of libgcrypt right? > > In the 1.6.0 release notes at > > http://lists.gnupg.org/pipermail/gcrypt-devel/2013-December/002775.html > > there is a list of changed APIs. Some of them are removed. > Which might cause issues. > >> Have you tried to compile some of the ports that depend on libgcrypt >> to see if nothing breaks? > > No, due to number of ports involved (104), list at > > http://people.freebsd.org/~pi/misc/libgcrypt-related-ports > > For this we probably need some exp-run ? > > If one considers this a security-related change, and probably needs > testing on functionality as well, I think that "commit and fix those few > that break" looks like a possible short-cut 8-} It's safer to do an exp-run. You never know if some important port breaks. You can attach your patch to the bug and assign it to portmgr. Maybe also change the subject to include [exp-run].