fixed
patchset (also simpler, using the cmake build infrastructure, which
lets us remove some patches).
Index: Makefile.inc
===
RCS file: /cvs/ports/net/miniupnp/Makefile.inc,v
retrieving revision 1.11
diff -u -p -r1.11 Makefi
I don't use these, but noticed they were really old. Anyone using them
want to give them a spin?
Index: libnatpmp/Makefile
===
RCS file: /cvs/ports/net/miniupnp/libnatpmp/Makefile,v
retrieving revision 1.13
diff -u -p -r1.13 Makefile
een
> addressed upstream.
>
> So far it works for me on amd64.
>
> OK?
Hi,
Iwas updating it to 2.2.2 and forgot to send a patch :) Some comments below.
>
> [0] https://github.com/miniupnp/miniupnp/blob/master/miniupnpd/Changelog.txt.
>
>
> diff --git Makefile Mak
://github.com/miniupnp/miniupnp/blob/master/miniupnpd/Changelog.txt.
diff --git Makefile Makefile
index 1c048358808..0bd731936d8 100755
--- Makefile
+++ Makefile
@@ -2,18 +2,17 @@
COMMENT= UPnP IGD daemon
-DISTNAME= miniupnpd-2.1
-REVISION= 2
+DISTNAME= miniupnpd-2.3.0
+# uses
The diff below updates both miniupnpc and miniupnpd to the latest
version.
okey?
Index: miniupnpc/Makefile
===
RCS file: /cvs/ports/net/miniupnp/miniupnpc/Makefile,v
retrieving revision 1.4
diff -u -p -u -p -r1.4 Makefile
,
David
Index: libnatpmp/Makefile
===
RCS file: /cvs/ports/net/miniupnp/libnatpmp/Makefile,v
retrieving revision 1.1.1.1
diff -u -p -r1.1.1.1 Makefile
--- libnatpmp/Makefile 23 Feb 2012 13:56:49 - 1.1.1.1
+++ libnatpmp/Makefile
On Mon, Jan 09, 2012 at 10:39:23AM +0100, Antoine Jacoutot wrote:
On Sat, Jan 07, 2012 at 01:11:20PM +0100, Antoine Jacoutot wrote:
Hi.
Attached are 2 ports:
Updated ports and added minisspd.
Anyone?
--
Antoine
On Sun, January 8, 2012 12:50, Antoine Jacoutot wrote:
On Sun, Jan 08, 2012 at 09:55:54AM +0100, Antoine Jacoutot wrote:
Yeah, the generated rule is bogus here.
I'll have a look at it. Thanks for testing.
Please try this new port (have a look at the README as well, some stuffs
changed).
On Sat, Jan 07, 2012 at 01:11:20PM +0100, Antoine Jacoutot wrote:
Hi.
Attached are 2 ports:
Updated ports and added minisspd.
* miniupnpd
The miniUPnP daemon is an UPnP IGD (Internet Gateway Device) which
provides NAT traversal services to any UPnP enabled client as well as
NAT Port
On Sat, Jan 07, 2012 at 05:25:43PM +0300, Kirill Bychkov wrote:
Hi. I've tested it with transmission. It tells, that port 51410 is closed.
sudo pfctl -a miniupnpd/* -s rules
pass in quick on xl0 on rdomain 0 inet proto tcp from any to any port = 51410
flags any label NAT-PMP 51410 tcp rdr-to
On Sun, Jan 08, 2012 at 09:55:54AM +0100, Antoine Jacoutot wrote:
Yeah, the generated rule is bogus here.
I'll have a look at it. Thanks for testing.
Please try this new port (have a look at the README as well, some stuffs
changed).
Thanks.
--
Antoine
miniupnpd.tgz
Description:
Hi.
Attached are 2 ports:
* miniupnpd
The miniUPnP daemon is an UPnP IGD (Internet Gateway Device) which
provides NAT traversal services to any UPnP enabled client as well as
NAT Port Mapping Protocol (NAT-PMP) on the network.
* miniupnpc
miniupnpc, the MiniUPnP client library, enables
Hi,
On Saturday, January 7, 2012 13:11 CET, Antoine Jacoutot
ajacou...@bsdfrog.org wrote:
Hi.
Attached are 2 ports:
* miniupnpd
The miniUPnP daemon is an UPnP IGD (Internet Gateway Device) which
provides NAT traversal services to any UPnP enabled client as well as
NAT Port Mapping
On 2012-01-07, Sebastian Reitenbach sebas...@l00-bugdead-prods.de wrote:
Hi,
On Saturday, January 7, 2012 13:11 CET, Antoine Jacoutot
ajacou...@bsdfrog.org wrote:
Hi.
Attached are 2 ports:
* miniupnpd
The miniUPnP daemon is an UPnP IGD (Internet Gateway Device) which
provides
On Sat, January 7, 2012 15:11, Antoine Jacoutot wrote:
Hi.
Attached are 2 ports:
* miniupnpd
The miniUPnP daemon is an UPnP IGD (Internet Gateway Device) which
provides NAT traversal services to any UPnP enabled client as well as
NAT Port Mapping Protocol (NAT-PMP) on the network.
Hi
The SECURITY file for miniupnpd, is only around in the ports tree.
It doesn't get installed, nor echoed out when installing the package,
nor is in pkg_info. Since the users are encouraged to install
packages, they will miss it, right?
there is a history of SECURITY files in the ports
On Sat, Jan 07, 2012 at 04:02:51PM +0100, Antoine Jacoutot wrote:
The SECURITY file for miniupnpd, is only around in the ports tree.
It doesn't get installed, nor echoed out when installing the package,
nor is in pkg_info. Since the users are encouraged to install
packages, they will
On Sat, Jan 07, 2012 at 05:27:24PM +0100, Marc Espie wrote:
On Sat, Jan 07, 2012 at 04:02:51PM +0100, Antoine Jacoutot wrote:
The SECURITY file for miniupnpd, is only around in the ports tree.
It doesn't get installed, nor echoed out when installing the package,
nor is in pkg_info.
On Sat, Jan 07, 2012 at 08:10:26PM +0100, Antoine Jacoutot wrote:
Copying from SECURITY to README looks fine, I would still prefer not to kill
SECURITY.
But what is the benefit of SECURITY in this case?
It's something you can find(1).
But yeah, we probably want to formalize things a bit
On Sat, Jan 07, 2012 at 09:08:25PM +0100, Marc Espie wrote:
On Sat, Jan 07, 2012 at 08:10:26PM +0100, Antoine Jacoutot wrote:
Copying from SECURITY to README looks fine, I would still prefer not to
kill
SECURITY.
But what is the benefit of SECURITY in this case?
It's something
20 matches
Mail list logo
