Bumped the ebuild of POPFile to v0.22.4, and changed the ebuild some to accomodate the extra stuff one can use with POPFile. Has not been tested extensively with the use-flags, and then only on x86, but I'm leaving the ~ppc as it seems it will run fine on PPC as well (the old ebuilds did at least)
Created attachment 80860 [details] popfile-0.22.4.ebuild
I know what I said on irc - but i think i was wrong(!). In re-reading this block: ssl? ( dev-libs/openssl !=dev-perl/IO-Socket-SSL-0.97 dev-perl/Net-SSLeay ) it strikes me that although we've avoided the 'bad' IO-Socket-SSL, we also haven't installed a better one...is the problem a conflict with IO::S::SSL-0.97 or just the general presence of IO::S::SSL?
Any advice greatfully received. Perl's definitely not my strong point :) Many thanks, Stu
From the Release Notes <http://sourceforge.net/project/shownotes.php?release_id=395653&group_id=63137>: | This version is a bug fix release and contains an important security | related bug fix. It is a highly recommended upgrade because of the | problem described in #1 below. | | WHAT'S CHANGED SINCE v0.22.3 | | 1. A bug in the handling of the charset in an email could be exploited | to cause POPFile to crash when downloading messages. If the versions in the tree are affected, we should do something soon.
(In reply to comment #2) > I know what I said on irc - but i think i was wrong(!). Sorry, been too long, don't remember this anymore, and didn't see the comment when you posted it :) > In re-reading this block: > > ssl? ( > dev-libs/openssl > !=dev-perl/IO-Socket-SSL-0.97 > dev-perl/Net-SSLeay > ) > it strikes me that although we've avoided the 'bad' IO-Socket-SSL, we also > haven't installed a better one...is the problem a conflict with IO::S::SSL-0.97 > or just the general presence of IO::S::SSL? It's just a problem with 0.97 it seems: http://popfile.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?FrequentlyAskedQuestions/SSL
Many thanks. I've added this ebuild into the tree. It should appear on your local rsync mirror in around one hour's time. Best regards, Stu