Procmail got updated!

Kevin Oberman rkoberman at gmail.com
Sun Dec 24 05:46:05 UTC 2017


On Sat, Dec 23, 2017 at 2:42 AM, Matthias Andree <matthias.andree at gmx.de>
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
>

OK. I'm not sure this is in any way fair and not just avoidance, but why,
specifically, should THIS port with no known vulnerabilities, people who
are willing to work to fix it,  and a fair number of users, be a so special
that it deserves summary execution from FreeBSD? Yes, it's unmaintained.
The upstream authors/maintainers advised a move to another port. But why
should THIS port be removed from hte system?
--
Kevin Oberman, Part time kid herder and retired Network Engineer
E-mail: rkoberman at gmail.com
PGP Fingerprint: D03FB98AFA78E3B78C1694B318AB39EF1B055683


More information about the freebsd-ports mailing list