| 1 |
On Fri, Apr 03, 2015 at 01:31:53PM +0200, hasufell wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> Not anymore. We will go for "libressl" USE flag for the same reason |
| 4 |
> there is a "libav" USE flag now (working subslots etc). |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
Um, ok. That still only allows one or the other to be installed though, |
| 7 |
right? So if you want a package that only works with openssl and one |
| 8 |
that only works with libressl, you are left wanting :)? |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
> decision... I guess you could still try to provide a compatibility patch |
| 11 |
> for openssl. |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
I mentioned that to Brent Cook, who is currently maintaining the |
| 14 |
portable version, and I don't think that's something he'd pull in |
| 15 |
upstream. I suppose we could have a local gentoo patch. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
I guess I'll just let this simmer for now and see how things develop. My |
| 18 |
preference (I think, at least at the moment) would be for both |
| 19 |
implementations to be able to coexist, like openssl and gnutls. It looks |
| 20 |
like that's the way it's heading in pkgsrc (the other place I'm |
| 21 |
maintaining openntpd), which should make things relatively simple there. |
| 22 |
If that's not going to be an option with Gentoo hopefully the best |
| 23 |
alternative will become clearer at some point ;). |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
Thanks... |
Archives