[QAT] r325510: 4x leftovers

2013-08-28 Thread Ports-QAT
- Update to 1.35 - Most patches have been accepted upstreams. The remaining ones have been submitted on http://sourceforge.net/p/xfe/bugs/176/ Release notes: This release adds a scripts feature: like in Nautilus, users can now apply custom shell scripts to a list of selected files. See th

Cacti vulnerable?

2013-08-28 Thread Andrea Venturoli
Hello. In ports we have Cacti 0.8.8a. According to 0.8.8b release notes (http://www.cacti.net/release_notes_0_8_8b.php), "multiple ... SQL injection vulnerabilities" were fixed in that release. Portaudit doesn't bring up any warning. Is the version in our port tree safe? bye & Thanks

Re: Cacti vulnerable?

2013-08-28 Thread Rodrigo OSORIO
Hi, Not really, according to cve, releases before 0.8.8b are affected, and we have 0.8.8a. - rodrigo On 28/08/13 09:49 +0200, Andrea Venturoli wrote: > Hello. > > In ports we have Cacti 0.8.8a. > According to 0.8.8b release notes > (http://www.cacti.net/release_notes_0_8_8b.php), "multiple ...

Re: Cacti vulnerable?

2013-08-28 Thread Florent Peterschmitt
Le 28/08/2013 10:10, Rodrigo OSORIO a écrit : > Hi, > > Not really, according to cve, releases before 0.8.8b are affected, > and we have 0.8.8a. > > - rodrigo And before 0.8.8b there is 0.8.8a. Or I missed something? -- Florent Peterschmitt | Please: flor...@peterschmitt.fr|

Re: Cacti vulnerable?

2013-08-28 Thread John Marino
On 8/28/2013 10:27, Florent Peterschmitt wrote: > Le 28/08/2013 10:10, Rodrigo OSORIO a écrit : >> Hi, >> >> Not really, according to cve, releases before 0.8.8b are affected, >> and we have 0.8.8a. >> >> - rodrigo > > And before 0.8.8b there is 0.8.8a. Or I missed something? You are agreeing wit

Re: Cacti vulnerable?

2013-08-28 Thread Florent Peterschmitt
Le 28/08/2013 10:30, John Marino a écrit : > He is saying the ports tree version is 0.8.8a and thus not safe, the > response to the question "is the port tree version safe?" Aha, so I missed something :) > John -- Florent Peterschmitt | Please: flor...@peterschmitt.fr| * Avoi

Re: Cacti vulnerable? / vuxml update

2013-08-28 Thread Rodrigo OSORIO
> In ports we have Cacti 0.8.8a. > According to 0.8.8b release notes > (http://www.cacti.net/release_notes_0_8_8b.php), "multiple ... SQL > injection vulnerabilities" were fixed in that release. > Portaudit doesn't bring up any warning. I just send a PR to update the vuxml database ( ports/181

Re: security/openssl speed issues

2013-08-28 Thread Ollivier Robert
According to John-Mark Gurney on Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 07:27:28PM -0700: > I guess now we need to figure out how to teach OpenSSL to use AES-NI > natively even when /dev/crypto is available... > > but at least we did solve the (non-)issue of bad OpenSSL performance... Excellent analysis, thank you

Re: Cacti vulnerable? / vuxml update

2013-08-28 Thread Kurt Jaeger
Hi! > > In ports we have Cacti 0.8.8a. > > According to 0.8.8b release notes > > (http://www.cacti.net/release_notes_0_8_8b.php), "multiple ... SQL > > injection vulnerabilities" were fixed in that release. > > Portaudit doesn't bring up any warning. > > I just send a PR to update the vuxml dat

"texlive" ports and "*-freebsd-doc-*" ports

2013-08-28 Thread Jerry
There is a problem building any of the "*-freebsd-doc-*" ports if the user has texlive installed and "TEX_DEFAULT=texlive" is placed in the "/etc/make.conf" file. Actually, the ports cannot be built. I realize that FreeBSD-10 is on the horizon. I am also aware that the modus operandi of FreeBSD is

RE: FreeBSD Port: gdal-1.10.0

2013-08-28 Thread Hacker, Benjamin T - GS
Thanks!! Your suggestion corrected my problem. Ben Hacker Jr. ITT Exelis Inc. -Original Message- From: Rainer Hurling [mailto:rhur...@gwdg.de] Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2013 12:42 AM To: Hacker, Benjamin T - GS Cc: 'sunp...@freebsd.org'; 'po...@freebsd.org' Subject: Re: FreeBSD Port:

Re: distfiles changed to new path

2013-08-28 Thread ill...@gmail.com
On 27 August 2013 20:13, Fbsd8 wrote: > I just did a portsnap run that updated the base port system. > > Now I see a port's distfile going to /var/ports/distfiles instead of > /usr/ports/distfiles. > > Is this a error in the newly updated base port system which contains the > default port make env

Re: distfiles changed to new path

2013-08-28 Thread Fbsd8
ill...@gmail.com wrote: On 27 August 2013 20:13, Fbsd8 wrote: I just did a portsnap run that updated the base port system. Now I see a port's distfile going to /var/ports/distfiles instead of /usr/ports/distfiles. Is this a error in the newly updated base port system which contains the defaul

cdrecord and CAMGETPASSTHRU

2013-08-28 Thread Warren Block
Trying to use cdrecord from cdrtools-devel on 9.2-PRERELEASE amd64 from Saturday, a generic kernel, gives :-( unable to CAMGETPASSTHRU for /dev/cd1: Inappropriate ioctl for device Rebuilding cdrtools-devel does not help. What changed? ___ freebsd

Re: "texlive" ports and "*-freebsd-doc-*" ports

2013-08-28 Thread Marc Fonvieille
On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 08:19:02AM -0400, Jerry wrote: > There is a problem building any of the "*-freebsd-doc-*" ports if the > user has texlive installed and "TEX_DEFAULT=texlive" is placed in the > "/etc/make.conf" file. Actually, the ports cannot be built. > Hello, This is a known problem. A

CFT: vlc 2.0.8 (with two PRs applied)

2013-08-28 Thread Juergen Lock
Hi! It's this time again, there's a new vlc version out and I'd like to update the port: svn co https://svn.redports.org/nox/multimedia/vlc/ I have applied two PRs as well, ports/181596 and ports/181610, so livemedia and ncurses should work better now as well: http://www.freeb

Re: NZBGet | Port needs a refreshj

2013-08-28 Thread Nicolas Raspail
Jos Chrispijn wrote: William Grzybowski: There is a PR for it, ports/177839. I'll take care. thanks William, keep up the good work! Best regards, Jos Chrispijn Hi I have open two PR about this port, one for the new version (ports/180832) and for the postProcess script terminated with unkn