On Fri, May 22, 2026 at 09:23:39AM +0100, Stuart Henderson wrote: > From: Stuart Henderson <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [update] net/sniproxy 0.13.1 > Date: Fri, 22 May 2026 09:23:39 +0100 > > On 2026/05/22 08:49, [email protected] wrote: > > Hello, > > > > Here is a very straightforward diff for net/sniproxy 0.13.1 > > Tested on amd64 and arm64 > > > > OK? > > are the pledge hits in tests a problem? (203 is mlock) > > make check-TESTS > PASS: address_test > PASS: buffer_test > PASS: cfg_tokenizer_test > table_test[52026]: pledge "", syscall 203
Actually, no, it would only have caused an issue in the case RAND_bytes() returned 0, which should never happen. I have been running this in prod for 3 weeks without issue. But you are right, it's better to correct that so here is 0.13.2 Index: Makefile =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/ports/net/sniproxy/Makefile,v diff -u -p -r1.18 Makefile --- Makefile 24 Mar 2026 18:21:42 -0000 1.18 +++ Makefile 22 May 2026 09:12:57 -0000 @@ -2,7 +2,7 @@ COMMENT = name-based proxying of HTTPS w GH_ACCOUNT = renaudallard GH_PROJECT = sniproxy -GH_TAGNAME = 0.11.1 +GH_TAGNAME = 0.13.2 CATEGORIES = net Index: distinfo =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/ports/net/sniproxy/distinfo,v diff -u -p -r1.13 distinfo --- distinfo 24 Mar 2026 18:21:42 -0000 1.13 +++ distinfo 22 May 2026 09:12:57 -0000 @@ -1,2 +1,2 @@ -SHA256 (sniproxy-0.11.1.tar.gz) = Jr3T68Vmv40VKtwanNpjblcGgZAOGdmXAasdYPfnHfg= -SIZE (sniproxy-0.11.1.tar.gz) = 426378 +SHA256 (sniproxy-0.13.2.tar.gz) = F1DmglXYFalDtPjG68bdAAbS7IOd+KIi6s3xITLFAD4= +SIZE (sniproxy-0.13.2.tar.gz) = 439735
