Date: Sun, 09 Nov 2003 15:15:38 +0000 From: Tim Bishop <tim@bishnet.net> To: FreeBSD-gnats-submit@FreeBSD.org Cc: tim@bishnet.net Subject: ports/59082: Fix port: security/f-prot Message-ID: <E1AIrHu-0009WB-Rd@pendennis.ukc.ac.uk> Resent-Message-ID: <200311091520.hA9FKMvo051040@freefall.freebsd.org>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>Number: 59082 >Category: ports >Synopsis: Fix port: security/f-prot >Confidential: no >Severity: non-critical >Priority: low >Responsible: freebsd-ports-bugs >State: open >Quarter: >Keywords: >Date-Required: >Class: maintainer-update >Submitter-Id: current-users >Arrival-Date: Sun Nov 09 07:20:20 PST 2003 >Closed-Date: >Last-Modified: >Originator: Tim Bishop >Release: FreeBSD 4.9-PRERELEASE i386 >Organization: >Environment: System: FreeBSD pendennis.ukc.ac.uk 4.9-PRERELEASE FreeBSD 4.9-PRERELEASE #5: Wed Sep 17 15:50:07 BST 2003 tdb@pendennis.ukc.ac.uk:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/PENDENNIS i386 >Description: Fix the md5 sum for this port's distfile. I've compared the old and new tarballs, and the only difference seems to be the definition files (which are binary, so I can't really compare them) This worries me slightly because I suspect they periodically rebuild the tarball with new definition files. Is there a solution to a problem like this? >How-To-Repeat: >Fix: Apply patch below. --- f-prot-4.2.0-md5fix.diff begins here --- diff -ruN f-prot.bak/distinfo f-prot/distinfo --- f-prot.bak/distinfo Wed Oct 22 04:08:51 2003 +++ f-prot/distinfo Sun Nov 9 15:11:02 2003 @@ -1 +1 @@ -MD5 (fp-freebsd-ws-4.2.0.tar.gz) = e775217b9d1eba2b9f0faeed6fd4e33f +MD5 (fp-freebsd-ws-4.2.0.tar.gz) = 2138b4f31b531f40983d5a4caf40b11d --- f-prot-4.2.0-md5fix.diff ends here --- >Release-Note: >Audit-Trail: >Unformatted:
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?E1AIrHu-0009WB-Rd>