Hi! > > > Starting from 20.08.2013 prosody is on 0.9, 0.9.2 was released in > > > January 2014. > > > > Have a look at > > > > http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=ports/182075 > > > > there is an update to 0.9.1 as a patch and one open question > > someone has to solve.
> Thanks for the link. I .. didn't know better to search there first. Sorry > about that. No problem, I learned to rely on http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr-summary.cgi?query only recently, as well 8-} > So I guess I want that bug to be resolved, with a bump to 0.9.2 > ideally :) Yes, probably. > > > Is there any chance to see an update to this port? Are you still > > > interested in this project or is the port currently abandoned? > > > Can I help with anything to bump this to a more current (ideally: THE > > > current) version? > > > > If you can try to coordinate with the luasec and luasocket maintainers ? > > Actually I think that's a non-issue (now). The comment from lx/the > maintainer of prosody claims that s2s is broken (no idea, haven't tried the > patch just yet) and wonders if we'd need the forked lua dependencies. > Looking at the prosody project page [1] even THEY don't realize that the > situation has changed and they still point to [2] as a 'fork just to get a > release out'. The luasec bug [3] was closed just a week ago - in other > words: luasec proper, the official version, got a new release out and the > fork should be irrelevant now. A quick chat with the prosody developers > seems to confirm that. > > That said: The luasec changes _shouldn't_ break s2s (merely disable some > features, such as PFS for TLS for example). Well, PFS for TLS in post-Snowden-time seems like a must-have feature, but who am I to judge 8-} > So .. this probably now needs a bump for lua51-luasec (which lists no > individual maintainer, points to po...@freebsd.org only) from 0.4 to 0.5. Sounds plausible, yes. > How would I approach that? > Looking at the port myself and giving it a try? Yes, but this needs some serious investigation to try. I just had a look, and there's no distfile, you need to get it from github, etc. I normally copy the port to some work dir, and start fixing the issues that come up. Here's the script to copy the dir to ~/myp/ ----------- #!/usr/local/bin/bash if [ X$1 = 'X' ] then echo "usage: $0 <port/dir>" exit 1 fi if [ ! -d /usr/ports/$1 ] then echo "$0: error: invalid directory '/usr/ports/$1'" exit 1 fi cd ~/myp && rm -rf $1 cd /usr/ports && tar cf - $1 | ( cd ~/myp; tar xf -) ----------- If I achive a workable port, I generate a diff and submit it using send-pr. Here's the script to generate the diff: ----------- #!/usr/local/bin/bash if [ X$1 = 'X' ] then echo "usage: $0 <port/dir>" exit 1 fi if [ ! -d /usr/ports/$1 ] then echo "$0: error: invalid directory '/usr/ports/$1'" exit 1 fi if [ -d /usr/ports/$1/work ] then rm -rf /usr/ports/$1/work fi if [ -d ~/myp/$1/work ] then rm -rf ~/myp/$1/work fi cd /usr/ports diff -r -u -N $1 ~/myp/$1 ----------- > Attaching that to a bug of sorts (similar to the prosody one)? Yes, somewhat like this. I would suggest to first experiment with smaller ports that need attention 8-} It's a steep learning curve. Check the queue for open PRs: http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr-summary.cgi?category=ports Find one with a patch, copy the port, apply the patch and try it. Submit an update to the bug-report that you have tested it and that it works. etc. It's a useful way to learn many things about software. -- p...@opsec.eu +49 171 3101372 6 years to go ! _______________________________________________ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"