X-Original-To: alpine-devel@lists.alpinelinux.org Received: from mail-wr0-f177.google.com (mail-wr0-f177.google.com [209.85.128.177]) by lists.alpinelinux.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7007A5C4E66 for ; Fri, 9 Feb 2018 16:14:21 +0000 (GMT) Received: by mail-wr0-f177.google.com with SMTP id u60so6054987wrb.8 for ; Fri, 09 Feb 2018 08:14:21 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=date:from:to:subject:message-id:in-reply-to:references:mime-version :content-transfer-encoding; bh=VUBDcgGaxrNOJ/W/sDtDTM9JHeHBTDIZnGPtf8dRxNY=; b=G6tB/VOGbQMfCTbg/Fhp8IsoIXqbWtow9ksikAFaYYUAEIZgZV39R7SM0gfc6hwPMj q9hJuiRuyg0VosdlZFdmK0c93wKW7AOFj+J3cHyqcxIdaA2bAFuNqnuzhF5ELPIOvb1L 6sxeuQW9EWoCjKBcoUk2KmC5f5JxXEJXMwTWyiaNwr+8aiOzTN3zUR8k7X3q1rvYWFDs 1hiUynP5jz3qiNhPywidPnPx4oBr510eO/beAGHmP5SNXxMMjJGpKTmdm2A0sRjq0lyN KkriBJToMjKk+tbaOzTPAcuhPwLkkCXG2vc3J+yT7CbFMW+E26nbrhyk8dzq6jrxRCDs 0GJw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:subject:message-id:in-reply-to :references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=VUBDcgGaxrNOJ/W/sDtDTM9JHeHBTDIZnGPtf8dRxNY=; b=ZZq60ujaF8cGj9UOBSKbHzhU26CXvgYfVm+eWp5mC0ea8JYjXpfIRF2RPUBm5SCYlY aMenge4UdALliuxxWFF/+cJvJ2RwDjsi4LMtSI+z4A69XrUmlt4A7u7cpTmjoR6xnst0 /NzzkMjYYSpmErXorn3/gAO6nJaQVXXmJ7nmGllE6JEnpCLzJbXe9RkHEvMhUlM/i2k+ gNiDqGRp80KqUi9dvEB5XP1xuBzBOlouEzM6C2Lz6gq/krX/tNTotkqxegGIt9r5vC8J +dG0UoC9T+Gh532SuXfdLY84MxYPOrXG9L0GfLcWOCxzwKVGwjFYf95VeUqvxkY23Zwg xy2w== X-Gm-Message-State: APf1xPDwBCar9VdA456BCyd2UQvHRlm7wkyvLoTOKfZqSg+VqEUJbbst hJQ73aobMcxrp7FGbMrZdfKk3Iw= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AH8x226TG4Z/PyEB/ZrStdq5EDpGsOK3CuPUjSqmps7gESLvBeUvqC4WnNlhchyTy8iTg0pU+fPv7Q== X-Received: by 10.223.185.34 with SMTP id k31mr2669540wrf.245.1518192860522; Fri, 09 Feb 2018 08:14:20 -0800 (PST) Received: from mechanicum.chadwicks.me.uk (mail.oesys.co. [82.71.11.172]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id x91sm4571608wrb.77.2018.02.09.08.14.19 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Fri, 09 Feb 2018 08:14:20 -0800 (PST) Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2018 16:14:04 +0000 From: Kevin Chadwick To: alpine-devel@lists.alpinelinux.org Subject: Re: [alpine-devel] Proposed change: openssl 1.1 as default system openssl implementation Message-ID: <20180209161404.594c66ee@mechanicum.chadwicks.me.uk> In-Reply-To: References: <20180208180544.3ff19e66@mechanicum.chadwicks.me.uk> <9750d294-4f83-3f20-17a1-2177ad62bfe3@adelielinux.org> <20180209130715.5aa36488@mechanicum.chadwicks.me.uk> X-Mailinglist: alpine-devel Precedence: list List-Id: Alpine Development List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Fri, 09 Feb 2018 14:32:12 +0000 Last mail, hardly fair to make that ridiculous email publicly and THEN go private! https://marc.info/?l=openbsd-tech&m=149183119728617&w=2 _______________________________________________________________________ > We have a bunch of patches in ports to deal with EPROTO and EBADMSG > not being defined. It would be nice to get rid of those. The diff > below also adds the also missing ENOTRECOVERABLE and EOWNERDEAD. > > Thoughts? > > (Dunno if there is a point describing verbosely what those new errno > values mean on other systems...) These are all in POSIX now. ENORECOVERABLE and EOWNERDEAD are errors returned for robus mutexes that we don't implement yet (but might want to implement at one point). EBASMSG and EPROTO are really obsolete values for streams. EBADMSG got re-used in catgets(3), but our implementation doesn't generate it and the message passing extension (which we don't implement). EPROTO probably should have been marked as obsolete (and therefore optional). Given that Darwin, FreeBSD, NetBSD, Linux and Solaris all provide this, we're probably better off adding them as well. ok kettenis@ _______________________________________________________________________ > Is that going out of its way for portability? I don't think so. The > _first_ step in pretending to care about portability, without even > talking about "going out of your way", is to respect standards, and > it is painfully obvious that OpenBSD isn't very interested in doing > so. > > I will ignore the nonsense about RNG. I think you are coming from porting in one direction and not having a balanced view. In many ways POSIX is influenced towards Linux unfairly too, like RFCS to Google and Apple etc.. _______________________________________________________________________ https://marc.info/?l=openbsd-tech&m=140332790726752&w=2 Few things to note... I suspect everyone working on LibReSSL is happy to hear the news about BoringSSL. Choice is good!! Their priority is on safety, not on ABI compatibility. Just like us. Over time, I suspect google's version will also become 'reduced API', since they require less legacy application support. That may give LibReSSL the opportunity to head in the same direction, if the applications are willing... Secondly, a lot of misinformation is being spread about the effort required to get LibReSSL-portable out the door. We've stripped the code so that it is POSIX-only. Therefore "Linux" compat is really not hard. We basically just need the following parts to be finished: - A clean build framework - and the finetunings of portable versions of our safetybelts: arc4random strlcpy strlcat explicit_bzero reallocarray timingsafe_bcmp timingsafe_memcmp So please stop believing rumours that we've made it hard to port! The entire world went to POSIX, and that's all this code needs to support. It is a small step. I don't think it will take much longer. patience... _______________________________________________________________________ https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1231734 https://lwn.net/Articles/625506/ --- Unsubscribe: alpine-devel+unsubscribe@lists.alpinelinux.org Help: alpine-devel+help@lists.alpinelinux.org ---