Re: Bug#648361: uninstallable on kfreebsd-amd64
On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 07:14:35PM +0100, Robert Millan wrote:
> [ CCing debian-bsd; if someone can test the patched version of PPTP
> on GNU/kFreeBSD, please do and report. Thanks! ]
Yes that would be very welcome!
> Hi Ola,
> 2011/11/13 Ola Lundqvist <email@example.com>:
> > Have you tested to install this package and actually seen that it
> > works in practice? The reason I ask is that as far as I know this
> > tool depends on the mppe support in the Linux kernel. I may be
> > wrong however.
> > I do not want to apply this until I have it confirmed that it actually
> > works to have a fully working mppe tunnel.
> I'm afraid I can't test it myself. However, IMHO presence in the
> FreeBSD ports collection is a good indicator that the (patched)
> version of pptp actually works with the kernel of FreeBSD.
That is an interesting point.
I found an interesting one as well here on the pptpclient home page:
"PPTP Client is a Linux, FreeBSD, NetBSD and OpenBSD client..."
There is also information available here
There the installation seems to be simple:
> Notice how my patch enables "-DUSER_PPP" in CFLAGS. This has a
> significant impact on the codepaths, most likely disabling the
> kernel-specific code you had in mind.
When looking deeper into this it looks like your change is only
applicable to GNU/kFreeBSD, right?
> Given the situation, I would find it reasonable if my explanation is
> not sufficient and you need further reassurance that pptp works on
> GNU/kFreeBSD before providing it. If that's the case, note that its
> current state doesn't fit with this intent either (since it's
> currently not just uninstallable but also unusable in case this was
I thought the package was linux only, but obviously I was wrong.
> An alternate solution would be to disable pptp on GNU/kFreeBSD by
> marking it Linux-specific (Architecture: linux-any) until someone can
> properly test it.
Oh. My mistake I thought this one was linux only. My bad. In this
case I think I should apply this as a first step.
However I have one note on the patch. I see that you use
some patches/series function. I have not used that before. I have simply
applied the patches in the old fashioned way. Is it ok if I continue
that way? I find the new patch mechanism a bit too slow and not very
> Robert Millan
--- Inguza Technology AB --- MSc in Information Technology ----
/ firstname.lastname@example.org Annebergsslingan 37 \
| email@example.com 654 65 KARLSTAD |
| http://inguza.com/ Mobile: +46 (0)70-332 1551 |
\ gpg/f.p.: 7090 A92B 18FE 7994 0C36 4FE4 18A1 B1CF 0FE5 3DD9 /