From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Apr 1 21:21:50 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4FFF9D99; Wed, 1 Apr 2015 21:21:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: from shell1.rawbw.com (shell1.rawbw.com [198.144.192.42]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 378C7C6A; Wed, 1 Apr 2015 21:21:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: from yuri.doctorlan.com (c-50-184-63-128.hsd1.ca.comcast.net [50.184.63.128]) (authenticated bits=0) by shell1.rawbw.com (8.14.9/8.14.9) with ESMTP id t31LLnuo077245 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Wed, 1 Apr 2015 14:21:49 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from yuri@rawbw.com) X-Authentication-Warning: shell1.rawbw.com: Host c-50-184-63-128.hsd1.ca.comcast.net [50.184.63.128] claimed to be yuri.doctorlan.com Message-ID: <551C616C.8080503@rawbw.com> Date: Wed, 01 Apr 2015 14:21:48 -0700 From: Yuri User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jung-uk Kim , "ports@freebsd.org" Subject: Re: Pourdriere produces faulty build results due to bsd.openssl.mk bug References: <551C5C4C.5090707@rawbw.com> <551C6051.4060803@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <551C6051.4060803@FreeBSD.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Dirk Meyer , Bryan Drewery X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 01 Apr 2015 21:21:50 -0000 On 04/01/2015 14:17, Jung-uk Kim wrote: > I know bsd.openssl.mk has been broken for very long time. For example, > > http://docs.freebsd.org/cgi/mid.cgi?50108FEF.3030405 > > However, I am not sure whether entirely removing it is the best way > going forward. I mean, removing of the dependency on base. Ports should use only openssl port. If you think this isn't a good idea, and ports should still occasionally use base openssl, would you care to explain why you think so? Yuri