Subject: misc/8112: Questions about crypto reachover
To: None <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: David Brownlee <email@example.com>
Date: 01/17/2000 11:59:58
We have an open PR on some problems with the new crypto reachover
Does anyone here have any thoughts or comments?
(please keep firstname.lastname@example.org in the cc)
> It used to be the case that one could build an `exportable'
> system, and then build `domestic' separately, layering it on
> top. Now, to build both an `exportable' system and the `secr'
> set, one has to build the entire system twice. This is a
> major pain in the arse.
> Furthermore, Makefiles which silently DTWT if a file or
> directory isn't present are an absolutely horrible idea in
> It seems that now we have the worst possible combination: no
> direct crypto integration, *and* a painful and flaky mechanism
> for handling the unbundled tree. Yuck.
> Go back to making cryptosrc separately buildable, or integrate
> the crypto directly in the main source tree.