From owner-freebsd-ports Sat Mar 15 11:30:14 2003 Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5565C37B404; Sat, 15 Mar 2003 11:30:13 -0800 (PST) Received: from centaur.acm.jhu.edu (centaur.acm.jhu.edu [128.220.223.65]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8580B43FA3; Sat, 15 Mar 2003 11:30:12 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from jflemer@acm.jhu.edu) Received: by centaur.acm.jhu.edu (Postfix, from userid 556) id 8B2DE13EAE; Sat, 15 Mar 2003 14:30:11 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by centaur.acm.jhu.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A65037E8E; Sat, 15 Mar 2003 14:30:11 -0500 (EST) Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2003 14:30:11 -0500 (EST) From: "James E. Flemer" Reply-To: "James E. Flemer" To: , Cc: Subject: samba 2.2.8 in fbsd 4.8 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org I suppose the maintainer is aware, but a big old security hole was found in Samba. I think it would be in our best interest if the Samba port was updated to 2.2.8 before the 4.8 release. I know we're in a port freeze but I think this would be allowed in. Unless of course the patches Trevor just added address this, Trevor? Even if the patches do, we might want the release version rather than a snapshot. I'll take a look at updating the port if the maintainer cannot at this time. -James To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message