Hello,
I have a CURRENT server with the sources of the kernel in /usr/src:
# svn info /usr/src
Path: /usr/src
Working Copy Root Path: /usr/src
URL: svn://svn.freebsd.org/base/head
Relative URL: ^/head
Repository Root: svn://svn.freebsd.org/base
Repository UUID: ccf9f872-aa2e-dd11-9fc8-001c23d0bc
As some of you may have seen, I have done a bit of work on
bsd.sites.mk recently.
One question I ran into: If a site offers both HTTPS and HTTP,
which of the two do we prefer? (Or do we want to list both?)
Gerald @FreeBSD.org
___
freebsd-ports@freebs
On Sat, 11 Mar 2017 10:53:01 +0100 (CET) Gerald Pfeifer
wrote:
> As some of you may have seen, I have done a bit of work on
> bsd.sites.mk recently.
>
> One question I ran into: If a site offers both HTTPS and HTTP,
> which of the two do we prefer? (Or do we want to list both?)
https first f
On 8 March 2017 at 08:04, Bob Willcox wrote:
> What is the best way to get synth to simply ignore certain ports when running
> the upgrade-system command with it? I would like for it to not upgrade firefox
> (don't want to lose my tab groups) so I'd rather that it not even consider
> updating fire
Tijl Coosemans writes:
> On Sat, 11 Mar 2017 10:53:01 +0100 (CET) Gerald Pfeifer
> wrote:
>
>> As some of you may have seen, I have done a bit of work on
>> bsd.sites.mk recently.
>>
>> One question I ran into: If a site offers both HTTPS and HTTP,
>> which of the two do we prefer? (Or do w
On Sat, Mar 11, 2017 at 04:14:03AM -0800, Eitan Adler wrote:
> On 8 March 2017 at 08:04, Bob Willcox wrote:
> > What is the best way to get synth to simply ignore certain ports when
> > running
> > the upgrade-system command with it? I would like for it to not upgrade
> > firefox
> > (don't want
On Sat, 11 Mar 2017 12:18:51 + (UTC) jbe...@freebsd.org (Jan Beich) wrote:
> Tijl Coosemans writes:
>> On Sat, 11 Mar 2017 10:53:01 +0100 (CET) Gerald Pfeifer
>> wrote:
>>> As some of you may have seen, I have done a bit of work on
>>> bsd.sites.mk recently.
>>>
>>> One question I ran into:
> On 11 Mar, 2017, at 10:13, Tijl Coosemans wrote:
>
> On Sat, 11 Mar 2017 12:18:51 + (UTC) jbe...@freebsd.org (Jan Beich) wrote:
>> Tijl Coosemans writes:
>>> On Sat, 11 Mar 2017 10:53:01 +0100 (CET) Gerald Pfeifer
>>> wrote:
As some of you may have seen, I have done a bit of work on
On Sat, 11 Mar 2017, Jan Beich wrote:
>> https first for people that run 'make makesum'.
> It was made MITM-friendly sometime ago.
>
> https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/ports/324051
With that, isn't https pretty pointless? I guess I'll leave
things as are, then, for that mirror that offers bot
> On 11 Mar, 2017, at 10:45, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
>
> On Sat, 11 Mar 2017, Jan Beich wrote:
>>> https first for people that run 'make makesum'.
>> It was made MITM-friendly sometime ago.
>>
>> https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/ports/324051
>
> With that, isn't https pretty pointless? I gue
On 11 March 2017 at 09:13, Tijl Coosemans wrote:
> On Sat, 11 Mar 2017 12:18:51 + (UTC) jbe...@freebsd.org (Jan Beich) wrote:
>> Tijl Coosemans writes:
>>> On Sat, 11 Mar 2017 10:53:01 +0100 (CET) Gerald Pfeifer
>>> wrote:
As some of you may have seen, I have done a bit of work on
On Sat, 11 Mar 2017 10:18:18 -0700 Adam Weinberger
wrote:
> On 11 Mar, 2017, at 10:13, Tijl Coosemans wrote:
>> On Sat, 11 Mar 2017 12:18:51 + (UTC) jbe...@freebsd.org (Jan
>> Beich) wrote:
>>> Tijl Coosemans writes:
On Sat, 11 Mar 2017 10:53:01 +0100 (CET) Gerald Pfeifer
wrot
> On 11 Mar, 2017, at 12:29, Tijl Coosemans wrote:
>
> On Sat, 11 Mar 2017 10:18:18 -0700 Adam Weinberger
> wrote:
>> On 11 Mar, 2017, at 10:13, Tijl Coosemans wrote:
>>> On Sat, 11 Mar 2017 12:18:51 + (UTC) jbe...@freebsd.org (Jan
>>> Beich) wrote:
Tijl Coosemans writes:
> On
> On 11 Mar, 2017, at 12:53, Adam Weinberger wrote:
>
>> On 11 Mar, 2017, at 12:29, Tijl Coosemans wrote:
>>
>> On Sat, 11 Mar 2017 10:18:18 -0700 Adam Weinberger
>> wrote:
>>> On 11 Mar, 2017, at 10:13, Tijl Coosemans wrote:
On Sat, 11 Mar 2017 12:18:51 + (UTC) jbe...@freebsd.org (J
On 09/03/2017 05:09, Andrea Venturoli wrote:
On 03/03/17 19:38, Christoph Moench-Tegeder wrote:
Any interaction with bug 215348 (1)? I'm still using that patch.
Testing revealed that this patch can prevent new profiles from accessing
lightning, which I considered undesirable.
Ok.
I kept tha
15 matches
Mail list logo