tech-pkg archive

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]

Re: libressl status



"Sevan / Venture37" <venture37%gmail.com@localhost> writes:

> I would say before we import libressl into pkgsrc, we should address
> all the packages which are currently broken by LibreSSL. The bulkbuild
> on OpenBSD/amd64 gives us a clear picture of what needs fixing and
> luckily in most of the major cases (Python & Apache) fixes have been
> applied upstream.
> http://mail-index.netbsd.org/pkgsrc-bulk/2015/04/06/msg011484.html

Certainly it sounds like fixing upstream packages is good progress, but
why do you think that needs to be ordered with making libressl available
under a subprefix?

> I'd personally like to see a complete switch to LibreSSL however it is
> not currently possible due to do that with all the operating systems
> we support in pkgsrc e.g AIX or IRIX. It is likely that both will
> co-exist for some time.

Agreed on that both will likely coexist for a long time.  That argues
for the subprefix (for one or the other) approach.  Do think that's the
right thing to do?

Attachment: pgpKWNMPYRnAC.pgp
Description: PGP signature



Home | Main Index | Thread Index | Old Index