Summary: | security/metasploit: Update to 6.2.23 | ||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Product: | Ports & Packages | Reporter: | Yonas Yanfa <yonas.yanfa> | ||||||||
Component: | Individual Port(s) | Assignee: | Nuno Teixeira <eduardo> | ||||||||
Status: | Closed FIXED | ||||||||||
Severity: | Affects Only Me | CC: | eduardo, fernape, tanawts | ||||||||
Priority: | --- | Flags: | bugzilla:
maintainer-feedback?
(tanawts) |
||||||||
Version: | Latest | ||||||||||
Hardware: | Any | ||||||||||
OS: | Any | ||||||||||
URL: | https://github.com/rapid7/metasploit-framework/compare/6.1.24...6.2.23 | ||||||||||
Attachments: |
|
Description
Yonas Yanfa
2022-10-11 22:19:24 UTC
Hi Yonas, Could you provide a patch? Maintainers are notify when a new version of the software is available (unless we tell portscout otherwise) so there is usually no need to open a PR for that :-) Hi Fernando, > Could you provide a patch? I cannot provide a patch, as I'm not interested in installing the ports collection. > Maintainers are notify when a new version of the software is available (unless we tell portscout otherwise) so there is usually no need to open a PR for that I've found many ports that are not kept up-to-date and that creating a PR is the best way to get the port updated. If you're looking for a better solution, the FreeBSD ports infrastructure should: 1. Automatically upgrade ports to the latest version without manual intervention 2. Automatically test ports before publishing #2 would require all port maintainers to create tests as a requirement for approving new ports and avoiding deprecation of old ports. Common automated test criteria could include: 1. `service <name> [enable/setup/start/stop]` all work. 2. If `service <name> setup` is required, it must be mentioned in the post install message. 3. command-line program works - eg. `program --version` outputs a version string. 4. HTTP REST APIs works, if present. 5. Built-in test suites run successfully. 6. A simple test program works - eg. creating accounts / databases / etc. With these automated tests, we should be more confident in shipping packages without the need for manual testing, which currently isn't happening consistently, and keep up with faster release cycles. (In reply to Yonas Yanfa from comment #2) >I cannot provide a patch, as I'm not interested in installing the ports collection. But packages (the one's you install with pkg install *) are created from the port-tree, so a patch would be greatly appreciated. you are just one step away from making a jail (poudriere?) and one "git clone"...install portlint and portclippy. I understand what you mean, but instead of of just telling what the newest version is (the same what portscout already does..most of the time) you could provide a patch...it's even faster It is fun to be a small part of a project..at least it is for me. >If you're looking for a better solution, the FreeBSD ports infrastructure should: Yes please start..i personally would be exited to see that..go for it!! >I've found many ports that are not kept up-to-date and that creating a PR is >the best way to get the port updated. >I would not say that FreeBSD is "outdated": https://repology.org/repositories/statistics Fedora Rawhide: Outdated: 4577 23.5% FreeBSD: Outdated: 5334 22.1% Much more packages and less "outdated" ones..that's kind of impressive. Created attachment 237583 [details]
security/metasploit: update to 6.2.21
Patch submitted to update Metasploit to 6.2.21
Latest version is 6.2.23. Could you provide a patch to it? Please use git formated diff. Thanks Created attachment 237593 [details]
security/metasploit: update to 6.2.21
Updated patch to be in git format per request
(In reply to tanawts from comment #7) Thanks for the diff. Latest version is 6.2.23, you can use this PR to send a diff for update. Cheers Thanks! I'm afraid this is my first new patch as a port maintainer since FreeBSD migrated from Subversion to Git; I don't have commit permissions, and the porters handbook doesn't seem to cover any further next steps. Is there anything else that needs to be done on my side? (In reply to tanawts from comment #9) You could provide a patch for 6.2.23 same way as you provided it for 6.2.21 and we can use this PR same way. Created attachment 237632 [details]
security/metasploit: update to 6.2.23
Git formatted patch to update Metasploit from 6.1.24 to 6.2.23
A commit in branch main references this bug: URL: https://cgit.FreeBSD.org/ports/commit/?id=23dc83f737c77c3c5f28c33de9680d666c8ae027 commit 23dc83f737c77c3c5f28c33de9680d666c8ae027 Author: Tanawts <tanawts@gmail.com> AuthorDate: 2022-10-26 12:34:22 +0000 Commit: Nuno Teixeira <eduardo@FreeBSD.org> CommitDate: 2022-10-26 12:36:07 +0000 security/metasploit: Update to 6.2.23 ChangeLog: https://github.com/rapid7/metasploit-framework/compare/6.1.24...6.2.23 PR: 266977 Reported by: yonas.yanfa@gmail.com security/metasploit/Makefile | 3 +-- security/metasploit/distinfo | 6 +++--- 2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) Committed, thanks! |