ruby 2.4.7,1 considered vulnerable?
trond.endrestol at ximalas.info
Sat Aug 31 08:14:41 UTC 2019
On Sat, 31 Aug 2019 17:43+1000, MJ wrote:
> Given the liberal use of portepoch in the package versions I expect
> the maintainer has got confused. Indeed perhaps it's the portepoch
> that's causing the issue. Perhaps contact the maintainer to get it
> worked through?
I just created PR 240227:
More information about the freebsd-questions