Created attachment 162535 [details] iperf3 3.1 The following patch updates the port to the recently released version 3.1. It builds fine on releng/10.2.
For future ference, changes for ports go into the "Individual Ports" component, not "Ports Framework" unless its a change to Mk/* files.
(In reply to Kubilay Kocak from comment #1) Oh, I know that, it was a kind of typo, only with a mouse :)
No problemo, you *should* be able to re-classify it (component, assignee) yourself if it happens again :)
With the bug in this state, am I supposed to review and commit the patch or give approval for someone else to commit it? Either way is fine, I'm just unsure of the protocol at this point since maintainer-feedback is set to ?, I'm the owner of the bug and the port maintainer. (And the diff looks fine, thanks for the reporter for doing this. I should have done this myself when I did the upstream iperf3 release.)
A commit references this bug: Author: bmah Date: Thu Oct 29 04:10:39 UTC 2015 New revision: 400440 URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/ports/400440 Log: Update to iperf-3.1. PR: 204092 Submitted by: pkubaj at riseup dot net Sponsored by: ESnet Changes: head/benchmarks/iperf3/Makefile head/benchmarks/iperf3/distinfo
Ah nevermind, I just committed it after a brief test. Fixed in r400440. Closing as FIXED, thanks again for the patch and reminder.
If/Since you're the maintainer, you may/should set the flag to + to avoid feedback/maintainer timeouts (and thus someone else being able to take/commit :) Also set the attachment maintainer-approval flag to + if you approve patches