From owner-freebsd-ports Sat Apr 29 23:58:19 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.FreeBSD.ORG [204.216.27.21]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C6C3B37BC19; Sat, 29 Apr 2000 23:58:17 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from kris@FreeBSD.org) Received: from localhost (kris@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.9.3/8.9.2) with ESMTP id XAA08811; Sat, 29 Apr 2000 23:58:17 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from kris@FreeBSD.org) X-Authentication-Warning: freefall.freebsd.org: kris owned process doing -bs Date: Sat, 29 Apr 2000 23:58:16 -0700 (PDT) From: Kris Kennaway To: knu@FreeBSD.org Cc: ady@freebsd.ady.ro, freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.org Subject: Removing FORBIDDEN tags on insecure ports In-Reply-To: <200004281114.EAA20398@freefall.freebsd.org> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Fri, 28 Apr 2000 knu@FreeBSD.org wrote: > State-Changed-From-To: open->closed > State-Changed-By: knu > State-Changed-When: Fri Apr 28 20:14:40 JST 2000 > State-Changed-Why: > Committed, thanks! By the way, I think it would be better to wait for confirmation that the new version has actually fixed the security problem before removing FORBIDDEN tags on insecure ports (sometimes developers think they've fixed a problem when in fact they haven't, or have created a new one). This is just a note to the ports crowd for the future - I think imap-uw can stay as is for now, though I've yet to check it. Kris ---- In God we Trust -- all others must submit an X.509 certificate. -- Charles Forsythe To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message