ports/177416: mail/postgrey has surfaced a bug in perl's taint checking

[Darren Pilgrim]

The following reply was made to PR ports/177416; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: Darren Pilgrim <ports.maintainer at evilphi.com>
To: Paul Beard <paulbeard at gmail.com>
Cc: "bug-followup at FreeBSD.org" <bug-followup at FreeBSD.org>
Subject: Re: ports/177416: mail/postgrey has surfaced a bug in perl's taint
 checking
Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2013 15:36:08 -0700

 On 2013-03-29 15:22, Paul Beard wrote:
 > Is p5-IO in the base, i.e., do the files installed by the port
 > replicate functionality that is now included in the base install? The
 > distinfo's modification date is May 17, 2011. The Makefile doesn't
 > test for a version. If so, why does it exist as a port? If it's only
 > for older versions, there's usually a test for that.
 
 There's plenty of outdated stuff in the ports tree.  Historically a port 
 didn't get deleted until it was unmaintained AND marked broken for a 
 significant length of time.  It's why portscout and its predecessors exist.
 
 > Is this just a namespace collision? Or cruft?
 
 Namespace collisions and multiple-implementation cruft are the 
 characteristics of (what used to be called) CPAN-hell. :)