OK, makes sense. I didn’t notice the dependency. (It would be great if 
pkg_info(1) had an option to list the dependencies of a given package but I 
didn’t find any. I can check the reverse using pkg_info -R. So other than 
looking at the source there doesn’t seem to be a way to do this.)

I’ll shut up now ;-)

Thanks!
-- 
Mike Fischer

> Am 02.06.2021 um 00:14 schrieb Giovanni Bechis <giova...@paclan.it>:
> 
> On 6/1/21 11:37 PM, Mike Fischer wrote:
>>> Am 01.06.2021 um 23:24 schrieb Giovanni Bechis <giova...@paclan.it>:
>>> 
>>> On 6/1/21 9:15 PM, Stuart Henderson wrote:
>>>> On 2021/06/01 16:10, Mike Fischer wrote:
>>>>> Friendly ping:
>>>>> 
>>>>> Not that this is urgent, but this patch hasn’t made it into the ports 
>>>>> tree yet AFAICT.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Could someone with CVS write permission please ok and commit (or NAK) 
>>>>> Giovanni's patch?
>>>> 
>>>> It's already OK'd, giovanni@ has an account
>>>> 
>>> I have committed the fix a couple of weeks ago.
>>> https://cvsweb.openbsd.org/ports/devel/p5-Net-Server/Makefile?rev=1.25&content-type=text/x-cvsweb-markup
>>> 
>>> Cheers
>>> Giovanni
>>> 
>> 
>> That fix was p5-Net-Server, not postgrey. Could you also update postgrey 
>> please?
>> 
> postgrey depends on p5-Net-Server, adding the missing dependency to 
> p5-Net-Server automatically fixed postgrey as well. 
> 
> 
>> Oh and I’m not sure I fully understand the semantics behind the CVS tags but 
>> wouldn’t the tags OPENBSD_6_9 and possibly even OPENBSD_6_8 also be required 
>> to get this to show up with pkg_add -u under OpenBSD 6.8/6.9?
>> 
>> Looking at 
>> https://cvsweb.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb/ports/mail/postgrey/Makefile seems 
>> to indicate that. Also this shows that your patch to p5-Net-Server is not 
>> visible on 6.9:
>> $ pkg_info -Q p5-Net-Server 
>> p5-Net-Server-2.009p0
>> p5-Net-Server-SS-PreFork-0.05p2
>> $ 
>> 
> development happens on -current, I do not think it's worth to backport this 
> simple fix to 6.9 or 6.8.
> "pkg_add p5-IO-Socket-INET6" is perfect workaround.
> 
> Giovanni
> 
> 

Reply via email to