Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2014 13:48:48 +0000 From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 191750] archivers/xz -> 5.0.5, MAINTAINERSHIP, MIRROR Message-ID: <bug-191750-13-g1OzVpSzC0@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> In-Reply-To: <bug-191750-13@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> References: <bug-191750-13@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=191750 jharris@widomaker.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|Issue Resolved |In Discussion Resolution|Overcome By Events |--- --- Comment #2 from jharris@widomaker.com --- 1. Actually, I had to dig archivers/xz out of svn BECAUSE my ports tree is up to date, but... 2. My still-supported/non-EoL/fully-patched base system has: %/usr/bin/xz --version xz (XZ Utils) 5.0.4 liblzma 5.0.4 3. And xz 5.0.5 was released on 2013-06-30, so the port (xz 5.0.4) was 6 months behind and should have been updated in 2014-01 rather than being deleted. 4. And we have other ports that peacefully coexist with their base counterparts: a. archivers/gzip b. archivers/bzip2 c. ports-mgmt/pkg, pkg-devel d. net/ntp, ntp-devel, ntp-rc e. textproc/diffutils f. textproc/flex g. sysutils/file h. plenty more to be found at http://svnweb.freebsd.org/base/head/contrib/ 5. And many of these ports are a necessity BECAUSE they're ahead of their base counterparts, e.g., file-5.11 -> file-5.19, again in my still-supported/non-EoL/fully-patched base system. 6. And 11-CURRENT isn't a RELEASE, according to: http://www.freebsd.org/releases/ So, you're telling me that NOBODY running a FreeBSD RELEASE at this time can have xz 5.0.5?! Really? Excellent merit^D^D^D^D^D^Dbureaucracy... -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?bug-191750-13-g1OzVpSzC0>