From: Stuart Henderson Subject: Re: [NEW] net/arti To: David Uhden Collado , Cc: , , Date: Sun, 15 Feb 2026 14:06:27 +0000 There are options other than a flavour (e.g. pointing at a path which is symlinked to the relevant executable, or installing a wrapper script that selects which one to use). Building the whole thing twice in bulk builds makes no sense. -- Sent from a phone, apologies for poor formatting. On 15 February 2026 13:23:18 David Uhden Collado wrote: > Landry Breuil wrote: >> >> a flavor ? hell no :) though you can add alternatives in RUN_DEPENDS in >> www/tor-browser/Makefile.inc, which would be the right fit here, but >> left to the MAINTAINER's judgment. >> >> Landry >> > > The www/tor-browser port manually inserts the path to the net/tor port > binary into the browser profile at build time. This is why it would be > necessary to create a flavor of this port if we want to give users the > option to choose which routing software to use. Both are supported by > the Tor Project. In the future, the C implementation of the Tor routing > software will likely be deprecated in favor of the Rust implementation. > > On the other hand, it would be beneficial to try porting oniux to > OpenBSD. However, I think this will be difficult since oniux uses Linux > kernel namespaces. > > https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/core/oniux > > I use both Arti and Oniux on Linux, and they work very well.