svn commit: r456368 - head/security/rubygem-openssl

[Remko Lodder]

Hi,

I meant that gitlab also has copies of certain versions because it does not work otherwise..

So in that regard, my vote would be to copy the port and add it as 20 version and depend on that..


Cheers,

Remko Lodder
 /* sent from my phone and thus brief and to the point *\

> Op 17 dec. 2017 om 20:21 heeft Joseph Mingrone <jrm at FreeBSD.org> het volgende geschreven:
> 
> Remko Lodder <remko at FreeBSD.org> writes:
> 
>>> On 17 Dec 2017, at 18:51, Joseph Mingrone <jrm at FreeBSD.org> wrote:
> 
>>> Sunpoet Po-Chuan Hsieh <sunpoet at FreeBSD.org> writes:
>>>> Author: sunpoet
>>>> Date: Thu Dec 14 20:44:16 2017
>>>> New Revision: 456368
>>>> URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/ports/456368
> 
>>>> Log:
>>>> Update to 2.1.0
> 
>>>> Changes:    https://github.com/ruby/openssl/blob/master/History.md
> 
>>> Anyone mind I downgrade this back to 2.0.6?
> 
>>> The new version, despite confirming to the Gemspec, breaks
>>> net-im/mastodon.
> 
>>> https://github.com/ruby/openssl/issues/180
> 
>>> Alternatively, we could copy it to create a security/rubygem-openssl20,
>>> but security/rubygem-openssl is only required by www/rubygem-ostatus2,
>>> which in turn is only required by net-im/mastodon.
> 
> 
>> www/gitlab also has several of those ports. I would opt for a copy and leave the
>> ‘current’ port as is.
> 
>> Cheers
>> remko
> 
> Hello remko,
> 
> I'm not clear what you mean by "those ports", but in this case nothing
> else depends on security/rubygem-openssl, so downgrading will not affect
> www/gitlab or any other port.
> 
> Joseph