Created attachment 169873 [details]
The attached SVN diff updates the security/softether port to the newest RTM version.
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]
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
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
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]
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]
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.
A commit references this bug:
Date: Mon Feb 27 20:56:33 UTC 2017
New revision: 434989
security/softether: update 4.18.9570 -> 4.20.9608
Submitted by: email@example.com (maintainer)
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.
for the move to a softether-devel.