There is no maintainer for squid ports, so I guess there is no plans.
IMO www/squid33 should be removed, no reason to keep it in ports.
www/squid should be moved to www/squid34 for some time (~3 or more months)
www/squid should be upgraded to 3.5 branch.
Meanwhile, I tried to create a port for
Hi Pavel,
When we had 3 unmaintained squid ports, the idea was the get down to
one, www/squid. The only reason www/squid33 is still in ports is
because you requested an extension on it's removal due to the FreeBSD
10.1 RC issues.
I personally don't want to see that contraction reversed.
On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 5:41 PM, Dewayne Geraghty
dewayne.gerag...@heuristicsystems.com.au wrote:
Thank you so much for posting this link! Merging r275456 and r275502
from stable/10 to my releng/10.1 src tree and rebuilding and installing
the kernel, means that I can once again manage squid
On Sat, 21 Feb 2015 08:28:40 +0100
Marko Cupać marko.cu...@mimar.rs wrote:
On Thu, 19 Feb 2015 21:23:15 -0500
Robert Simmons rsimmo...@gmail.com wrote:
That is true. It looks like an update to both 3.5 and 3.4 were
released on the same day. How about dropping www/squid33 and
creating
On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 11:28 PM, Marko Cupać marko.cu...@mimar.rs wrote:
On Thu, 19 Feb 2015 21:23:15 -0500
Robert Simmons rsimmo...@gmail.com wrote:
That is true. It looks like an update to both 3.5 and 3.4 were
released on the same day. How about dropping www/squid33 and creating
a
On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 8:18 AM, Johan Hendriks joh.hendr...@gmail.com
wrote:
Op 23-02-15 om 16:31 schreef Marko Cupać:
On Sat, 21 Feb 2015 08:28:40 +0100
Marko Cupać marko.cu...@mimar.rs wrote:
On Thu, 19 Feb 2015 21:23:15 -0500
Robert Simmons rsimmo...@gmail.com wrote:
That is
Op 23-02-15 om 16:31 schreef Marko Cupać:
On Sat, 21 Feb 2015 08:28:40 +0100
Marko Cupać marko.cu...@mimar.rs wrote:
On Thu, 19 Feb 2015 21:23:15 -0500
Robert Simmons rsimmo...@gmail.com wrote:
That is true. It looks like an update to both 3.5 and 3.4 were
released on the same day. How
On 24/02/2015 3:45 AM, Nick Rogers wrote:
On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 8:18 AM, Johan Hendriks joh.hendr...@gmail.com
wrote:
Op 23-02-15 om 16:31 schreef Marko Cupać:
On Sat, 21 Feb 2015 08:28:40 +0100
Marko Cupać marko.cu...@mimar.rs wrote:
On Thu, 19 Feb 2015 21:23:15 -0500
Robert Simmons
On Thu, 19 Feb 2015 21:23:15 -0500
Robert Simmons rsimmo...@gmail.com wrote:
That is true. It looks like an update to both 3.5 and 3.4 were
released on the same day. How about dropping www/squid33 and creating
a www/squid34 port. Then updating the www/squid port to 3.5.2.
I would say this is
On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 7:13 PM, Nick Rogers ncrog...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 6:46 AM, Robert Simmons rsimmo...@gmail.com wrote:
According to the Squid website:
Provided for archival purposes only. Not intended for general use in
new installations.
This is marking all
According to the Squid website:
Provided for archival purposes only. Not intended for general use in
new installations.
This is marking all versions of Squid except 3.5
http://www.squid-cache.org/Versions/
I would recommend removing all the older unsupported versions except 3.5.
On Wed, Feb 18,
On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 6:46 AM, Robert Simmons rsimmo...@gmail.com wrote:
According to the Squid website:
Provided for archival purposes only. Not intended for general use in
new installations.
This is marking all versions of Squid except 3.5
http://www.squid-cache.org/Versions/
I would
It seems that squid 3.5 is becoming the latest recommended production
quality version. Squid 3.4.12 and 3.5.2 were just released today. What is
everyones thought (or the maintainers plan) on moving the www/squid port
from 3.4 to 3.5?
It looks like the www/squid33 port has been kept around past
13 matches
Mail list logo
