On Sun, Aug 02, 2020 at 01:09:18PM -0700, Ryan Freeman wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 01, 2020 at 03:47:19AM +, Brian Callahan wrote:
> > Hi ports and Ryan --
> >
> > I noticed via Repology that our version of chocolate-doom is
> > vulnerable to CVE-2020-14983 [0].
> >
> > The simple solution is to
On Sat, Aug 01, 2020 at 03:47:19AM +, Brian Callahan wrote:
> Hi ports and Ryan --
>
> I noticed via Repology that our version of chocolate-doom is
> vulnerable to CVE-2020-14983 [0].
>
> The simple solution is to update to version 3.0.1, which contains the
> fix [1].
>
> Doom works here
On Sat, Aug 01, 2020 at 10:32:53AM -0700, Ryan Freeman wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 01, 2020 at 03:47:19AM +, Brian Callahan wrote:
> > Hi ports and Ryan --
> >
> > I noticed via Repology that our version of chocolate-doom is
> > vulnerable to CVE-2020-14983 [0].
> >
> > The simple solution is to
On Sat, Aug 01, 2020 at 03:47:19AM +, Brian Callahan wrote:
> Hi ports and Ryan --
>
> I noticed via Repology that our version of chocolate-doom is
> vulnerable to CVE-2020-14983 [0].
>
> The simple solution is to update to version 3.0.1, which contains the
> fix [1].
>
> Doom works here
Hi ports and Ryan --
I noticed via Repology that our version of chocolate-doom is
vulnerable to CVE-2020-14983 [0].
The simple solution is to update to version 3.0.1, which contains the
fix [1].
Doom works here for me.
OK?
~Brian
[0] https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2020-14983
[1]
Brian Callahan writes:
> Hi ports and Ryan --
>
> I noticed via Repology that our version of chocolate-doom is
> vulnerable to CVE-2020-14983 [0].
>
> The simple solution is to update to version 3.0.1, which contains the
> fix [1].
>
> Doom works here for me.
In my testing singleplayer and
Here is an updated patch with your suggestion incorporated.
On Sat, Jul 27, 2019 at 1:55 PM Ryan Freeman wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 27, 2019 at 04:13:07PM -0400, Brian Callahan wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 7/27/19 3:52 PM, Ryan Freeman wrote:
> > >Thanks Brian. How about this, then? Same thing, just
On Sat, Jul 27, 2019 at 04:13:07PM -0400, Brian Callahan wrote:
>
>
> On 7/27/19 3:52 PM, Ryan Freeman wrote:
> >Thanks Brian. How about this, then? Same thing, just without
> >Simon's name in the DESCR.
> >
>
> How about just "Chocolate Doom aims to provide an experience
> identical to that
On 7/27/19 3:52 PM, Ryan Freeman wrote:
Thanks Brian. How about this, then? Same thing, just without Simon's
name in the DESCR.
How about just "Chocolate Doom aims to provide an experience identical
to that of the original games on original hardware." Same effect, no
weird "author"
On 7/26/19 8:46 PM, Ryan Freeman wrote:
Hey All,
For some reason my normal email doesn't seem to be working with regards to
reaching ports@.
Apologies for the gmail-based delivery.
This isn't a version update, just a change to the package DESCR, and
removal of MESSAGE
in lieu of a pkg
Hey All,
For some reason my normal email doesn't seem to be working with regards to
reaching ports@.
Apologies for the gmail-based delivery.
This isn't a version update, just a change to the package DESCR, and
removal of MESSAGE
in lieu of a pkg README. I've tried to dress it up to cover most
On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 06:55:50PM -0800, Ryan Freeman wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 07:14:18PM -0800, Ryan Freeman wrote:
> > After prodding from bentley@ about modified chunk canary crashes,
> > when running with 'ln -s S /etc/malloc.conf', I had a go at
> > resolving it. Lucky for me, the
On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 07:14:18PM -0800, Ryan Freeman wrote:
> After prodding from bentley@ about modified chunk canary crashes,
> when running with 'ln -s S /etc/malloc.conf', I had a go at
> resolving it. Lucky for me, the new sdl2-branch of chocolate-doom
> seems to neatly skirt around the
After prodding from bentley@ about modified chunk canary crashes,
when running with 'ln -s S /etc/malloc.conf', I had a go at
resolving it. Lucky for me, the new sdl2-branch of chocolate-doom
seems to neatly skirt around the issue.
I first had a go at seeing if the current release could just be
Update to chocolate-doom 2.3.0
https://github.com/chocolate-doom/chocolate-doom/releases/tag/chocolate-doom-2.3.0
ports-related highlights:
- don't need gmake anymore
- don't need to modify final binary path via sed anymore
I remembered to try portcheck on this for once, only one complaint:
On Tue, Dec 02, 2014 at 09:41:03AM -0800, Ryan Freeman wrote:
Hey,
Patch to update to chocolate-doom 2.1.0. Lots of fixes/enhancements, see:
https://github.com/chocolate-doom/chocolate-doom/releases/tag/chocolate-doom-2.1.0
Builds/runs fine on amd64, ok?
Cheers,
-ryan
For the
Hey,
Patch to update to chocolate-doom 2.1.0. Lots of fixes/enhancements, see:
https://github.com/chocolate-doom/chocolate-doom/releases/tag/chocolate-doom-2.1.0
Builds/runs fine on amd64, ok?
Cheers,
-ryan
? chocolate-doom-2.1.0.diff
Index: Makefile
On Tue, Dec 02, 2014 at 09:41:03AM -0800, Ryan Freeman wrote:
Hey,
Patch to update to chocolate-doom 2.1.0. Lots of fixes/enhancements, see:
https://github.com/chocolate-doom/chocolate-doom/releases/tag/chocolate-doom-2.1.0
Builds/runs fine on amd64, ok?
forgot the best part of the
On Tue, Dec 02, 2014 at 09:43:54AM -0800, Ryan Freeman wrote:
On Tue, Dec 02, 2014 at 09:41:03AM -0800, Ryan Freeman wrote:
Hey,
Patch to update to chocolate-doom 2.1.0. Lots of fixes/enhancements, see:
https://github.com/chocolate-doom/chocolate-doom/releases/tag/chocolate-doom-2.1.0
On Mon, Jul 09, 2012 at 04:09:33PM -0700, Ryan Freeman wrote:
Hi,
This updates chocolate-doom to 1.7.0. Not too many changes:
http://chocolate-doom.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/chocolate-doom/tags/chocolate-doom-1.7.0/NEWS?revision=2511view=markup
I meant to actually summarize the
Hi,
This updates chocolate-doom to 1.7.0. Not too many changes:
http://chocolate-doom.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/chocolate-doom/tags/chocolate-doom-1.7.0/NEWS?revision=2511view=markup
Cheers,
-ryan
? chocolate-doom-1.7.0.diff
Index: Makefile
On Wed, Mar 07, 2012 at 11:56:44AM -0800, Ryan Freeman wrote:
I have had this sitting around for about a year, this
patch cleans up this port by removing the need for the patches,
instead opting to use some perl.
it also fixes the port correctly ignoring python.
I am unsure if the
I have had this sitting around for about a year, this
patch cleans up this port by removing the need for the patches,
instead opting to use some perl.
it also fixes the port correctly ignoring python.
I am unsure if the revision bump is required, as the resulting
packing list is exactly the
Hi Everybody!
Here is a diff to update chocolate-doom from 1.5.0 to 1.6.0.
There are a couple 'fixes' that enhance the authenticity of the
port to the original doom executables, some desktop file gooes
added, and some chocolate-setup enhancements.
i had to add USE_GMAKE = Yes to allow it to
On 2011-05-20, Ryan Freeman r...@slipgate.org wrote:
--gBBFr7Ir9EOA20Yy
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Hi Everybody!
Here is a diff to update chocolate-doom from 1.5.0 to 1.6.0.
There are a couple 'fixes' that enhance the authenticity of the
port
On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 10:34:10PM +, Stuart Henderson wrote:
On 2011-05-20, Ryan Freeman r...@slipgate.org wrote:
--gBBFr7Ir9EOA20Yy
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Hi Everybody!
Here is a diff to update chocolate-doom from 1.5.0 to
On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 01:48:57PM -0800, Ryan Freeman wrote:
On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 11:16:10AM +0100, Jasper Lievisse Adriaanse wrote:
On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 04:22:05PM -0800, Ryan Freeman wrote:
Hello ports@,
It's that time again, Simon has emailed me notification of
the newest
On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 04:22:05PM -0800, Ryan Freeman wrote:
Hello ports@,
It's that time again, Simon has emailed me notification of
the newest chocolate-doom release. As there has been previous
discussion from the 1.2.1-1.4.0 release, here are a few quick
notes to refresh some memories:
On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 11:16:10AM +0100, Jasper Lievisse Adriaanse wrote:
On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 04:22:05PM -0800, Ryan Freeman wrote:
Hello ports@,
It's that time again, Simon has emailed me notification of
the newest chocolate-doom release. As there has been previous
discussion
Excerpts from Ryan Freeman's message of Mon Aug 16 09:13:29 -0700 2010:
Excerpts from Ryan Freeman's message of Fri Aug 13 08:49:30 -0700 2010:
Hello ports@
Here is a patch updating my chocolate-doom port from 1.2.1 to the
latest version, 1.4.0. Daniel Dickman previously submitted a
Excerpts from Jacob Meuser's message of Sat Aug 14 04:33:21 -0700 2010:
On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 08:49:30AM -0700, Ryan Freeman wrote:
One thing to note is fraggle's efforts to add support for openbsd's
OPL device driver, and a software OPL emulator to play back doom's
music as closely as
Excerpts from Ryan Freeman's message of Fri Aug 13 08:49:30 -0700 2010:
Hello ports@
Here is a patch updating my chocolate-doom port from 1.2.1 to the
latest version, 1.4.0. Daniel Dickman previously submitted a patch
to me updating to 1.3.0, however Edd Barrett informed me that the
1.4.0
On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 08:49:30AM -0700, Ryan Freeman wrote:
One thing to note is fraggle's efforts to add support for openbsd's
OPL device driver, and a software OPL emulator to play back doom's
music as closely as possible to the way it would have originally
sounded back in 1993 with the
Hello ports@
Here is a patch updating my chocolate-doom port from 1.2.1 to the
latest version, 1.4.0. Daniel Dickman previously submitted a patch
to me updating to 1.3.0, however Edd Barrett informed me that the
1.4.0 version would not build on sparc64.
To summarize changes, the 1.4.0 and 1.5.0
On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 04:04:56PM -0700, Ryan Freeman wrote:
tested this on two differnet i386 machines and plays great, no issues
to be seen with this update. thanks to Daniel Dickman!
-ryan
I hate to be a buzzkill, but this doesnt appear to work on sparc64 :(
edd-sparc% chocolate-doom
On Sun, Mar 28, 2010 at 01:32:56PM +0100, Edd Barrett wrote:
On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 04:04:56PM -0700, Ryan Freeman wrote:
tested this on two differnet i386 machines and plays great, no issues
to be seen with this update. thanks to Daniel Dickman!
-ryan
I hate to be a buzzkill, but
On Sun, Mar 28, 2010 at 11:42:55AM -0700, Ryan Freeman wrote:
I hate to be a buzzkill, but this doesnt appear to work on sparc64 :(
hmm well no its still good to find bugs. if chocolate-doom 1.2.1 was still
working fine, i'll get in contact with simon (the author, i've been friends
with and
tested this on two differnet i386 machines and plays great, no issues
to be seen with this update. thanks to Daniel Dickman!
-ryan
On Sat, Mar 20, 2010 at 10:49:07PM -0400, Daniel Dickman wrote:
Here's an update of chocolate to 1.3.0 if you don't already have it. I've
been playing it on amd64
38 matches
Mail list logo
