Re: libressl status

["Sevan / Venture37" <venture37%gmail.com@localhost>]

Hi Greg,

On 7 April 2015 at 12:56, Greg Troxel <gdt%ir.bbn.com@localhost> wrote:
> 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?

Because whether you import LibreSSL or not, some issues will become a
problem anyway with the next release of OpenSSL. You also don't wan't
to be switching back and forth between LibreSSL integration &
addressing packages using removed functionality.

>> 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?

Yes, but I'd like to see the one or the other approach rather than
trying to make the two exist side by side, on operating systems such
as OS X that could mean 3+ versions on one system, which is ugly.


Sevan