Procmail got updated!

Ted Hatfield ted at io-tx.com
Sat Dec 23 16:42:38 UTC 2017


On Sat, 23 Dec 2017, Matthias Andree wrote:

> Am 23.12.2017 um 08:12 schrieb Kevin Oberman:
>>
>> So, why does Eugene's question have no relevance to the procmail
>> case?  Could you please explain?
>
> Because I am not willing to discuss generics when we have a specific
> case of port at hand.
> The attempted generalization distracts from that, and I insinuate that
> distraction is the purpose.
> Everyone is free to start a new thread about general port maintenance
> and removal principles.
>

I think the best reason to keep procmail available in ports is that 
there are still quite a number of people still using it.

In fact opensource.com has an article dated 11/01/2017 titled:
SpamAssassin, MIMEDefang, and Procmail: Best Trio of 2017
https://opensource.com/article/17/11/spamassassin-mimedefang-and-procmail

Not necessarily an argument for code safety but a good argument that it's 
still being used by quite a number of people.

I think that as long as someone is willing to patch the software when 
vulnerabilities come up we should keep the port available.

Ted Hatfield


More information about the freebsd-ports mailing list