Date: Thu, 20 May 2004 21:30:28 +0200 From: Remko Lodder <remko@elvandar.org> To: Fernan Aguero <fernan@iib.unsam.edu.ar> Cc: Mark Linimon <linimon@lonesome.com> Subject: Re: ports/66740: [MAINTAINER] security/f-prot-sig: update to 20040517 Message-ID: <40AD0754.1060504@elvandar.org> In-Reply-To: <20040520190342.GB2784@iib.unsam.edu.ar> References: <40ACCF16.80306@xbsd.org> <Pine.LNX.4.44.0405201317410.28097-100000@pancho> <20040520190342.GB2784@iib.unsam.edu.ar>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Fernan, *stripped your reply since it's huge* I can agree with your proposal, perhaps when stated how critical etc should be used it gets more clear for everyone. A thought: source/ports: stuff totally not functioning anymore, the base system is unable to perform it's normal tasks for docs: Serious: Source/ports: The system is able to run, but has some minor faults that limit the services running on the host.. for docs: The documentation is totally incorrect, telling you to enter yes instead of no on a crucial part of a base application. (giving up security etc). Non critical: source/ports: there are some errors in the make, but the application works, no services are impacted on the base and ports system. for docs: typo's, weird explaination etc. -- Kind regards, Remko Lodder Elvandar.org/DSINet.org www.mostly-harmless.nl Dutch community for helping newcomers on the hackerscene
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?40AD0754.1060504>