Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2014 09:09:22 -0700 From: Nick Rogers <ncrogers@gmail.com> To: "freebsd-ports@freebsd.org" <freebsd-ports@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: www/dansguardian revival? Message-ID: <CAKOb=YZQ7U7=0fxY9udoFgJkcM8E-73fgZ2SrJf06Nm5wPPCkA@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <c7cd9d25374a8c0d9c9393e8a530b9d7@ultimatedns.net> References: <CAKOb=YZyE%2BVnNNkQvEpw8bP=0FqSQtw56CjkoT4G9Dd43HitVw@mail.gmail.com> <b28a8d926970cbdb4d76fd23f8f161a4@ultimatedns.net> <20141021093930.512251194d972a238e27e45a@mimar.rs> <c7cd9d25374a8c0d9c9393e8a530b9d7@ultimatedns.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Oct 21, 2014 at 6:29 PM, Chris H <bsd-lists@bsdforge.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 21 Oct 2014 09:39:30 +0200 Marko Cupa=C4=87 <marko.cupac@mimar.rs=
>
> wrote
>
> > On Mon, 20 Oct 2014 17:47:19 -0700
> > "Chris H" <bsd-lists@bsdforge.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Unless theirs any objection. I'll take it. I'll open a pr(1)
> > > with a shar(1) ready, in about an hour.
> > >
> > > --Chris
> >
> > Nice to hear that dansguardian will be back in ports. I also used it
> > for years in combination with www/squid33 without problem. I was
> > compiling it from ports, and the trick was to compile squid33 first,
> > and dansguardian only after, as dansguardian would only check existence
> > of /use/local/bin/squid, and if it was already there, no matter which
> > version, it would happily compile, install and work.
>
> Right. But there's ${STAGE} to deal with, as well. I may
> make sqid34 the DEPENDS (I'm still testing).
> I'm also working with the -devel version, and will likely
> convert it to the (un)devel version, as there is less user
> overhead involved -- RESTRICTED/COPYRIGHT/LICENSE/{...}
>
Thanks for doing this right. I think making squid 3.4 (www/squid) a
dependency is reasonable. Squid 3.5 is in beta and will probably be the
official stable release sometime soon. I wonder if www/squid will get
updated to 3.5, or will there be www/squid35? May be something to consider
with respect to dansguardian.
I haven't upgraded to the "alpha" 2.12 version yet, but it seems like it
may be the ideal "production" release these days, as the last update to the
stable 2.10 version was in 2009, and it looks like the 2.12 branch has been
patched more recently (Sept 2012). Anyone have any good/bad experience with
2.12.0.2 compared to 2.10.1.1?
>
> Should be able to post a complete version, sometime
> tomorrow.
>
> --Chris
>
>
> > --
> > Marko Cupa=C4=87
> > https://www.mimar.rs
> > _______________________________________________
> > freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
> > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
> > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscribe@freebsd.org=
"
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
>
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAKOb=YZQ7U7=0fxY9udoFgJkcM8E-73fgZ2SrJf06Nm5wPPCkA>