On Fri, 21 Oct 2011 09:29:10 +0000 (UTC), Stuart Henderson wrote: >On 2011-10-21, Rod Whitworth <glis...@witworx.com> wrote: >> On Fri, 21 Oct 2011 00:23:28 -0400, Lawrence Teo wrote: >> >> Are you sure that the above changes are what you really want? >> >> I don't have access to my build machine ATM to do any real checking but >> that segment I quoted above looks strange to my bleary eye. > >This is a diff of a diff, they are always hard to read. You get used >to it after working on ports for a while! > >>>- # Registration file: >>>- # Where to store the current registrations. >>>- # An empty value means we do not save registrations. Make sure that >>>+ # Memory settings > >This is a change in the context of a line which is being patched. >(i.e. it's syncing with a change in the original file). > >>>+@@ -100,7 +100,7 @@ user = nobody >>> # the specified directory path does exist! >>>+ # Note: If running in chroot jail, this path starts relative >>>+ # to the jail. >>> -registration_file = /var/lib/siproxd/siproxd_registrations >>> +registration_file = siproxd_registrations > >This is ok, the default config did not run in a chroot jail, the port >is changing this so this change is reasonable. However I think it may be >slightly more clear to use "registration_file = /siproxd_registrations". > > The glitch I thought I saw was: - # An empty value means we do not save registrations. Make sure that followed by: # the specified directory path does exist!
Did that not leave an orphaned bit of a sentence? *** NOTE *** Please DO NOT CC me. I <am> subscribed to the list. Mail to the sender address that does not originate at the list server is tarpitted. The reply-to: address is provided for those who feel compelled to reply off list. Thankyou. Rod/ --- This life is not the real thing. It is not even in Beta. If it was, then OpenBSD would already have a man page for it.
