Summary: | New REJIK, version for SQUID 3.4 | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Product: | Ports & Packages | Reporter: | Oleg Deordiev <admin> | ||||||
Component: | Individual Port(s) | Assignee: | freebsd-ports-bugs (Nobody) <ports-bugs> | ||||||
Status: | Closed Not Accepted | ||||||||
Severity: | Affects Many People | CC: | marino, roma.a.g | ||||||
Priority: | --- | ||||||||
Version: | Latest | ||||||||
Hardware: | Any | ||||||||
OS: | Any | ||||||||
Attachments: |
|
Description
Oleg Deordiev
2014-10-17 14:41:47 UTC
I disagree with the proposed naming. In 3 months, there will only be one squid port, www/squid. Likewise, there should only be one corresponding rejik port. It should not be renamed after revival. OK, i make only one version for latest version of squid. See attach. Created attachment 148419 [details]
Rever to name rejik, tergetted to latest squid 3.4
*** Bug 194417 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** There's don't revive ports that have no maintainer. Besides agreeing to be the maintainer (honestly) you need to provide proof that this version builds properly. You can provide poudriere bug logs with "-t" option or poudriere testport logs to prove this. correction: We don't revive ports that have no maintainer. the new attachment is not a shar, it's some kind of sharutils script. I don't know why it's provide instead of a shar. Secondly, the MAINTAINER=ports@FreeBSD.org kills it thirdly, a straight "bring back port using SVN" is probably wrong (not to mention it was broken with it was removed I recall). As it is now, I would "reject" this PR. If nothing changes, I will. closing request due to inactivity (as promised) This is unmodified copy of old one, totally broken. I started new one https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=194837 |