Re: Procmail got updated!

2017-12-23 Thread Dave Horsfall
I'm beginning to regret starting this thread; then again, I do come from a long line of stirrers (to which some bods on this list will attest)... And yes, I'm still annoyed that "jive"[*] got deleted for no technical reason whatsoever; then again, I'm still bemused by Americans taking a leak

Re: Procmail got updated!

2017-12-23 Thread Kevin Oberman
On Sat, Dec 23, 2017 at 2:42 AM, Matthias Andree wrote: > Am 23.12.2017 um 08:12 schrieb Kevin Oberman: > > > > So, why does Eugene's question have no relevance to the procmail > > case? Could you please explain? > > Because I am not willing to discuss generics when we

Re: Procmail got updated!

2017-12-23 Thread Matthias Apitz
On Saturday, 23 December 2017 17:42:26 CET, Ted Hatfield wrote: ... I think that as long as someone is willing to patch the software when vulnerabilities come up we should keep the port available. Ted Hatfield +1 matthias -- Sent from my Ubuntu phone

Re: Procmail got updated!

2017-12-23 Thread Ted Hatfield
On Sat, 23 Dec 2017, Matthias Andree wrote: Am 23.12.2017 um 08:12 schrieb Kevin Oberman: So, why does Eugene's question have no relevance to the procmail case?  Could you please explain? Because I am not willing to discuss generics when we have a specific case of port at hand. The

Re: Procmail got updated!

2017-12-23 Thread Matthias Andree
Am 23.12.2017 um 08:12 schrieb Kevin Oberman: > > So, why does Eugene's question have no relevance to the procmail > case?  Could you please explain? Because I am not willing to discuss generics when we have a specific case of port at hand. The attempted generalization distracts from that, and I

Re: Procmail got updated!

2017-12-22 Thread Eugene Grosbein
23.12.2017 14:12, Kevin Oberman wrote: > >>> So, you demand we stop shipping any unmaintained software with our > Ports & Packages? > >>> Absence of CVEs means nothing and almost any non-trivial software has > bugs (axiom). > >> Eugene, these are attempts to distract from the

Re: Procmail got updated!

2017-12-22 Thread Kevin Oberman
On Fri, Dec 22, 2017 at 2:29 AM, Matthias Andree wrote: > Am 22.12.2017 um 07:09 schrieb Eugene Grosbein: > > 22.12.2017 9:50, Matthias Andree пишет: > >> Am 21.12.2017 um 10:16 schrieb Eugene Grosbein: > >> > >>> So, you demand we stop shipping any unmaintained software

Re: Procmail got updated!

2017-12-22 Thread Matthias Andree
Am 22.12.2017 um 07:09 schrieb Eugene Grosbein: > 22.12.2017 9:50, Matthias Andree пишет: >> Am 21.12.2017 um 10:16 schrieb Eugene Grosbein: >> >>> So, you demand we stop shipping any unmaintained software with our Ports & >>> Packages? >>> Absence of CVEs means nothing and almost any non-trivial

Re: Procmail got updated!

2017-12-21 Thread Eugene Grosbein
22.12.2017 9:50, Matthias Andree пишет: > Am 21.12.2017 um 10:16 schrieb Eugene Grosbein: > >> So, you demand we stop shipping any unmaintained software with our Ports & >> Packages? >> Absence of CVEs means nothing and almost any non-trivial software has bugs >> (axiom). > > Eugene, these are

Re: Procmail got updated!

2017-12-21 Thread Matthias Andree
Am 21.12.2017 um 10:16 schrieb Eugene Grosbein: > So, you demand we stop shipping any unmaintained software with our Ports & > Packages? > Absence of CVEs means nothing and almost any non-trivial software has bugs > (axiom). Eugene, these are attempts to distract from the argument, or to mount

Re: Procmail got updated!

2017-12-21 Thread Eugene Grosbein
On 21.12.2017 14:24, Matthias Andree wrote: What happened with old good "Tools, not policy" thing? >>> >>> It's simpler than that, no policy involved. >>> >>> The tool had a hollow head, and broke after several years of banging it, >>> and the former tool maker told the public it's out of

Re: Procmail got updated!

2017-12-21 Thread Eugene Grosbein
On 21.12.2017 07:35, Kevin Oberman wrote: >>> What happened with old good "Tools, not policy" thing? >> >> It's simpler than that, no policy involved. >> >> The tool had a hollow head, and broke after several years of banging it, >> and the former tool maker told the public it's out of warranty

Re: Procmail got updated!

2017-12-20 Thread Matthias Andree
Am 21.12.2017 um 06:07 schrieb Adam Weinberger: >> On 20 Dec, 2017, at 17:19, Matthias Andree >> wrote: >> >> Am 20.12.2017 um 06:40 schrieb Eugene Grosbein: >>> On 20.12.2017 01:03, Matthias Andree wrote: >>> Dear Ted, Eugene, >>> [skip] >>> >>> What happened with

Re: Procmail got updated!

2017-12-20 Thread Dave Horsfall
On Wed, 20 Dec 2017, Adam Weinberger wrote: I'm a little unsettled by this discussion, because it is moving into territory with which we have very little precedent. And the precedent that it would establish is not wholly within our mandate. Am I the only one who remembers the kerfuffle over

Re: Procmail got updated!

2017-12-20 Thread Adam Weinberger
On 20 Dec, 2017, at 17:19, Matthias Andree wrote: Am 20.12.2017 um 06:40 schrieb Eugene Grosbein: On 20.12.2017 01:03, Matthias Andree wrote: Dear Ted, Eugene, [skip] What happened with old good "Tools, not policy" thing? It's simpler than that, no policy

Re: Procmail got updated!

2017-12-20 Thread Ted Hatfield
On Wed, 20 Dec 2017, Kevin Oberman wrote: On Wed, Dec 20, 2017 at 4:19 PM, Matthias Andree wrote: Am 20.12.2017 um 06:40 schrieb Eugene Grosbein: On 20.12.2017 01:03, Matthias Andree wrote: Dear Ted, Eugene, [skip] What happened with old good "Tools, not policy"

Re: Procmail got updated!

2017-12-20 Thread Kevin Oberman
On Wed, Dec 20, 2017 at 4:19 PM, Matthias Andree wrote: > Am 20.12.2017 um 06:40 schrieb Eugene Grosbein: > > On 20.12.2017 01:03, Matthias Andree wrote: > > > >> Dear Ted, Eugene, > > [skip] > > > > What happened with old good "Tools, not policy" thing? > > > > > > It's

Re: Procmail got updated!

2017-12-20 Thread Matthias Andree
Am 20.12.2017 um 06:40 schrieb Eugene Grosbein: > On 20.12.2017 01:03, Matthias Andree wrote: > >> Dear Ted, Eugene, > [skip] > > What happened with old good "Tools, not policy" thing? > > It's simpler than that, no policy involved. The tool had a hollow head, and broke after several years of

Re: Procmail got updated!

2017-12-19 Thread Eugene Grosbein
On 20.12.2017 01:03, Matthias Andree wrote: > Dear Ted, Eugene, [skip] What happened with old good "Tools, not policy" thing? ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send

Re: Procmail got updated!

2017-12-19 Thread Ted Hatfield
On Tue, 19 Dec 2017, Matthias Andree wrote: Am 19.12.2017 um 01:30 schrieb Ted Hatfield: On Mon, 18 Dec 2017, Matthias Andree wrote: Am 18.12.2017 um 00:17 schrieb Dave Horsfall: Doing my regular update, and...     Upgrading procmail from 3.22_9 to 3.22_10... Good grief; who's the

Re: Procmail got updated!

2017-12-19 Thread Matthias Andree
Am 19.12.2017 um 01:30 schrieb Ted Hatfield: > > > On Mon, 18 Dec 2017, Matthias Andree wrote: > >> Am 18.12.2017 um 00:17 schrieb Dave Horsfall: >>> Doing my regular update, and... >>> >>>     Upgrading procmail from 3.22_9 to 3.22_10... >>> >>> Good grief; who's the masochist who volunteered to

Re: Procmail got updated!

2017-12-19 Thread Roger Marquis
Can certainly sympathize depending on the threat model, but how is that any different from Equifax' not having time to patch Struts or not having time to change the oil in your car or to brush your teeth ... That's a non-sequitur if I understand the response correctly. Procmail IS patched and

Re: Procmail got updated!

2017-12-19 Thread Adam Vande More
On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 10:47 AM, Roger Marquis wrote: > As one of the "irresponsible" people who is still using procmail on our >> systems and has built an number of scripts and customer infrastructure >> around it I take exception to the term irresponsible. Perhaps the

Re: Procmail got updated!

2017-12-19 Thread Roger Marquis
As one of the "irresponsible" people who is still using procmail on our systems and has built an number of scripts and customer infrastructure around it I take exception to the term irresponsible. Perhaps the better word is overworked. If I had the time to move to dovecot/sieve or maildrop as a

Re: Procmail got updated!

2017-12-19 Thread Christoph Moench-Tegeder
## Matthias Andree (matthias.and...@gmx.de): > Sunpoet, can we mark the port as deprecated given that even the upstream > once said it should best be abolished? I can't find the reference now, Here: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=769938#11

Re: Procmail got updated!

2017-12-18 Thread Eugene Grosbein
19.12.2017 7:30, Ted Hatfield wrote: > > > On Mon, 18 Dec 2017, Matthias Andree wrote: > >> Am 18.12.2017 um 00:17 schrieb Dave Horsfall: >>> Doing my regular update, and... >>> >>> Upgrading procmail from 3.22_9 to 3.22_10... >>> >>> Good grief; who's the masochist who volunteered to

Re: Procmail got updated!

2017-12-18 Thread Ted Hatfield
On Mon, 18 Dec 2017, Matthias Andree wrote: Am 18.12.2017 um 00:17 schrieb Dave Horsfall: Doing my regular update, and...     Upgrading procmail from 3.22_9 to 3.22_10... Good grief; who's the masochist who volunteered to support this obscure insecure and hitherto-unsupported scripting

Re: Procmail got updated!

2017-12-18 Thread Matthias Andree
Am 18.12.2017 um 00:17 schrieb Dave Horsfall: > Doing my regular update, and... > >     Upgrading procmail from 3.22_9 to 3.22_10... > > Good grief; who's the masochist who volunteered to support this > obscure insecure and hitherto-unsupported scripting language? >

Procmail got updated!

2017-12-17 Thread Dave Horsfall
Doing my regular update, and... Upgrading procmail from 3.22_9 to 3.22_10... Good grief; who's the masochist who volunteered to support this obscure insecure and hitherto-unsupported scripting language? -- Dave Horsfall DTM (VK2KFU) "Those who don't understand security will suffer."