| 1 |
On 03/05/2015 05:19 AM, Andrew Savchenko wrote: |
| 2 |
> |
| 3 |
> As for libressl, idea of the project is good, but what worries me |
| 4 |
> that it is API incompatible with other solutions. So it can't be |
| 5 |
> used as a drop-in replacement for openssl or other implementations. |
| 6 |
> This way more resources are being dispersed for nothing. |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
No, it is mostly API compatible (similar to ffmpeg/libav), but |
| 10 |
definitely not ABI compatible. They have broken the API only where they |
| 11 |
thought the feature is so bad, it should be removed (e.g. RAND_egd() or |
| 12 |
compression support). A lot of build failures are just build system |
| 13 |
related (e.g. people checking for a specific openssl version). |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
I am using it as a drop-in replacement on 3 machines, including a server. |
Archives