| 1 |
I agree with the proposal to sunset LibreSSL. |
| 2 |
Supporting it benefits very few users due to how non-universal the support of |
| 3 |
this option is. I see it as entirely sensible choice on apps' upstreams part to |
| 4 |
not collaborate on libressl support, motivation being focusing on more typical |
| 5 |
user setups. |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
But I have one loosely related question. About USE=bindist of openssl & openssh. |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
My impression is that when you spin up a new Gentoo setup from stage3, very |
| 10 |
early on you are typically forced by situations to switch off USE=bindist for |
| 11 |
openssl and openssh. I conclude that one can't redistribute more elaborate |
| 12 |
system images and binpkgs because of this. |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
However there's no `bindist` flag and therefore no such situation with libressl |
| 15 |
package. I never did good research of why this is so, so I am still wondering: |
| 16 |
what does that mean in practice? |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
Does this mean libressl has some advantage for binary redistributability of |
| 19 |
elaborate system images and binary packages? |
Archives