Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2016 12:43:23 +0200 From: Kurt Jaeger <lists@opsec.eu> To: "Danilo G. Baio" <dbaio@bsd.com.br> Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: security/w3af update Message-ID: <20160712104323.GG95302@home.opsec.eu> In-Reply-To: <CAKZCxeX241-ggomApQXF1rGwE7a8XAk8-xr5oCp7P5bCKOmUQw@mail.gmail.com> References: <CAKZCxeX241-ggomApQXF1rGwE7a8XAk8-xr5oCp7P5bCKOmUQw@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi! > I wrote an update for security/w3af and the hole was deeper than I thought. Thanks! That looks very interesting! > It was necessary several new ports as dependency: [...] > I did not open a PR yet... I am wondering if is better open a new PR for > each dependency or just one PR for security/w3af, anyone could help ? If you create PRs for each depend and link them to the main PR for the security/w2af update, that would be the recommended way. > There are still a few issues to be resolved and plugins to be tested. This > happens with me too: > https://github.com/andresriancho/w3af/issues/13636 > > The patch is here: > http://dbaio.bs2cloud.com.br/FreeBSD/w3af/w3af_1.6.49.patch If you can add that patch to the port ? -- pi@opsec.eu +49 171 3101372 4 years to go !
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20160712104323.GG95302>