libxul

[Antonio Olivares]

On Sat, Aug 18, 2012 at 6:25 PM, ajtiM <lumiwa at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi!
>
> There are vulnerabilities in libxul-1.9.2 very long time and looks like
> nothing is better. Are there a new libxul version somewhere to download,
> please?
>
>
>
> portaudit -Fda
> auditfile.tbz                                 100% of   79 kB  316 kBps
> New database installed.
> Database created: Sat Aug 18 18:15:04 CDT 2012
> Affected package: libxul-1.9.2.28_1
> Type of problem: mozilla -- multiple vulnerabilities.
> Reference: http://portaudit.FreeBSD.org/dbf338d0-dce5-11e1-
> b655-14dae9ebcf89.html
>
> Affected package: libxul-1.9.2.28_1
> Type of problem: mozilla -- multiple vulnerabilities.
> Reference: http://portaudit.FreeBSD.org/bfecf7c1-
> af47-11e1-9580-4061862b8c22.html
>
> Affected package: libxul-1.9.2.28_1
> Type of problem: mozilla -- multiple vulnerabilities.
> Reference:
> http://portaudit.FreeBSD.org/380e8c56-8e32-11e1-9580-4061862b8c22.html
>
> 3 problem(s) in your installed packages found.
>
> You are advised to update or deinstall the affected package(s) immediately.
> Mitja
> --------
> http://jpgmag.com/people/lumiwa
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-questions at freebsd.org mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscribe at freebsd.org"

I was wanting to ask this question for a long time, but you have
beaten me to it :)  I was going to ask specifically if firefox does
depend on libxul that it is necessary?  Otherwise, why do we have to
see this every time we update our ports?  I have seen that there's a
configuration option for libxul so that it can install, but using
portmaster the option is not the same or not present?

Anyone want to take a shot at explaining this never ending libxul-* saga?

Regards,


Antonio