Bug 209195
| Summary: | [maintainer] security/softether - port update | ||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | Ports & Packages | Reporter: | net | ||||||||||||||
| Component: | Individual Port(s) | Assignee: | Kurt Jaeger <pi> | ||||||||||||||
| Status: | Closed FIXED | ||||||||||||||||
| Severity: | Affects Only Me | CC: | dch, hrs, pi | ||||||||||||||
| Priority: | --- | ||||||||||||||||
| Version: | Latest | ||||||||||||||||
| Hardware: | Any | ||||||||||||||||
| OS: | Any | ||||||||||||||||
| Attachments: |
|
||||||||||||||||
Testbuilds@work I had a quick look at the softether port update. The patch changes a few pathes to /var/db/softether/, which I would rather put into /var/log/softether/. Is there a reason to have eg. the SERVER_LOG_DIR_NAME to go to /var/db/ instead of /var/log ? Similar security_log etc ? Created attachment 169888 [details]
Updated diff
Hi,
attached is an updated diff that pulls in /var/log/softether and corresponding subdirs for server, packet logger etc. and solves a problem with linking the final firmware.
Created attachment 169931 [details]
Portlint compliance ensured
Hi,
this (hopefully) final patch ensures portlint compliance.
attachment 169888 [details] has many changes to files/patch*, which are missing from attachment 169931 [details] (the newer one). And the older one had a patch that did not apply: Patch patch-src__Mayaqua__Unix.c failed to apply cleanly. I'm a bit short on time, otherwise I would try so put all the stuff together. Can you try to sort this out ? Created attachment 176792 [details]
Complete port as tgz archive
Hi,
dunno why svnlite diff won't include all changed files, though the attached tgz archive includes everything required.
It seems there are 2 versions of this port since November 2016:
net/softethervpn Cross-platform Multi-protocol VPN Software
security/softether Softether VPN solution
Could we add:
CATEGORIES= net security
And consolidate this down to just 1?
Given security/softether has been around since 2015, it would make more sense (less confusion to users) to consolidate here.
If the 2nd one is actually the proposed "development" branch (see https://github.com/SoftEtherVPN/SoftEtherVPN/issues/268 thread) then it should probably be net/softether-devel so the relationship is clear.
Yes, they are duplicates. When hrs@ committed the second version, he said he's going to merge both -- which is still pending. Created attachment 180304 [details]
svnlite diff
Hello,
attached is the diff that should catch everything this time. Meanwhile also tested under FreeBSD 11
If I apply the patch using svn patch, the port fails in make patch. Any ideas ? Created attachment 180342 [details]
svn diff
Yes, it looks like in my test jail I used there was something very very wrong so svn / svnlite were not able to catch up most of the changes.
This has been corrected and finally svn was able to catch up everything for the required diff.
testbuilds@work Committed, thanks! A commit references this bug: Author: pi Date: Mon Feb 27 20:56:33 UTC 2017 New revision: 434989 URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/ports/434989 Log: security/softether: update 4.18.9570 -> 4.20.9608 PR: 209195 Submitted by: net@arrishq.net (maintainer) Changes: http://www.softether.org/5-download/history Changes: head/security/softether/Makefile head/security/softether/distinfo head/security/softether/files/patch-src__Cedar__Cedar.h head/security/softether/files/patch-src__Cedar__Client.h head/security/softether/files/patch-src__Cedar__Nat.h head/security/softether/files/patch-src__Cedar__Server.c head/security/softether/files/patch-src__Mayaqua__Cfg.c head/security/softether/files/patch-src__Mayaqua__Cfg.h head/security/softether/files/patch-src__Mayaqua__Kernel.c head/security/softether/files/patch-src__Mayaqua__Network.c head/security/softether/files/patch-src__Mayaqua__Table.h head/security/softether/files/patch-src__Mayaqua__Unix.c head/security/softether/pkg-message head/security/softether/pkg-plist Bit late but yes - the version here is the RTM version, while the other one is the beta version. Maybe some kind of softether-devel port might be the better place for beta versions. See https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=217732 for the move to a softether-devel. |
Created attachment 169873 [details] svn diff The attached SVN diff updates the security/softether port to the newest RTM version.