Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2014 03:42:40 -0500 From: "Matthew D. Fuller" <fullermd@over-yonder.net> To: Bryan Drewery <bdrewery@FreeBSD.org> Cc: "ports@FreeBSD.org" <ports@FreeBSD.org>, Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: Dependencies: base vs. ports (Was: Re: ports/187468) Message-ID: <20140313084240.GA15587@over-yonder.net> In-Reply-To: <53204C90.4050103@FreeBSD.org> References: <531FAF5D.1010207@FreeBSD.org> <20140312044851.GA28621@FreeBSD.org> <53204C90.4050103@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 07:01:20AM -0500 I heard the voice of Bryan Drewery, and lo! it spake thus: > > Take openssl for example, [...] >From the user perspective, this in particular has been an occasional but steady low-level grumble of mine for years, and I've definitely come to wish it were hidden away. The few times I've wanted a newer version for something and tried using the ports openssl, it's just turned into a giant mess of conflicts between the two and I've had to give up and undertake a big cleanup process. Maybe if you set the make.conf flag and go only ports openssl straight from the first server setup it would work right, but I'm not even sure about _that_. Wasn't there just a discussion earlier this week about something not honoring it right? So, yeah; if you ask me, openssl can't possibly be given the lib/private or libbsdssl or whatnot treatment too soon :) -- Matthew Fuller (MF4839) | fullermd@over-yonder.net Systems/Network Administrator | http://www.over-yonder.net/~fullermd/ On the Internet, nobody can hear you scream.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20140313084240.GA15587>