ioquake3 support more platforms
kamikaze at bsdforen.de
Fri Dec 18 11:31:42 UTC 2009
Mark Linimon wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 17, 2009 at 04:48:43PM +0100, Dominic Fandrey wrote:
>> A committer explained to me that he doesn't want to deal with SVN
>> snapshot based ports. Is that a common attitude and what should
>> I do to remedy this?
> Well, the problem is that we (FreeBSD) can't guarantee whether the
> contents of a resulting package are secure or not, or really, what
> the contents are at all. I personally would only be comfortable with
> a default setting of NO_PACKAGE in this case. Individual users could
> manually override it.
But that's not different for any port. E.g. sysutils/bsdadminscripts is
all mine, I create the distfiles and maintain the port, their is no
guarantee that I don't do evil apart from me being quite certain that
Why can one assume that an ioquake release is safe? One really cannot.
It's made by the same people who maintain the non-trustworthy SVN.
What if I created a sourceforge project freebsd-ioquake and published
my distfiles there as ioquake freebsd releases. Would it suddenly
Also it's a -devel port. That kinda screams "At your own risk" right
into your face.
> I don't know if there is a formal policy about such ports. Probably,
> there ought to be.
I think there can be no guarantee given for anything whatsoever. So
I do not see how a policy could be useful.
A: Because it fouls the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet and in e-mail?
More information about the freebsd-ports