Precedence: list
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAML-UdtkGdXhbxwYRCv_bTKQRyOrDnodXbOALkAAegta0dzyfg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <5A0114AF.4050208@adelielinux.org> <20171107083614.15b25476@vostro.util.wtbts.net>
 <CAML-UdtkGdXhbxwYRCv_bTKQRyOrDnodXbOALkAAegta0dzyfg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Alba Pompeo <albapompeo@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2018 08:53:35 -0200
Message-ID: <CAJDAfTCnsdrhuKoZwsxw32LtwrOio4h9HhQL09Cji4rnwh6NHg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [alpine-devel] TLS library provider for makedepends
To: Kiyoshi Aman <aphrael@alpinelinux.org>
Cc: Timo Teras <timo.teras@iki.fi>, "A. Wilcox" <awilfox@adelielinux.org>, 
	alpine-dev <alpine-devel@lists.alpinelinux.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I heard good things about BearSSL.
https://bearssl.org/


On Tue, Feb 6, 2018 at 8:29 PM, Kiyoshi Aman <aphrael@alpinelinux.org> wrot=
e:
> Hi,
>
> I think it's inappropriate for libressl to be considered a replacement fo=
r
> openssl. Whether it's secure or not, the project has not kept its API
> compatibility promises, therefore making it impossible to compile softwar=
e
> that is necessary for webapps such as taiga. Consequently, I support
> returning to openssl as system default, and only keeping libressl around =
for
> software which actually requires it.
>
> On Tue, Nov 7, 2017 at 12:36 AM Timo Teras <timo.teras@iki.fi> wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, 6 Nov 2017 20:04:31 -0600
>> "A. Wilcox" <awilfox@adelielinux.org> wrote:
>>
>> > However, Ad=C3=A9lie targets 32-bit x86, 32-bit MIPS, 32-bit PowerPC, =
and
>> > 32-bit ARM.  Obviously this is therefore a quite significant issue for
>> > us.  We do not want to have to soft-fork every package in the Alpine
>> > aports repository that depends on OpenSSL or LibreSSL to change the
>> > library provider.  I am soliciting ideas on how to move forward.
>> >
>> > My own idea would be to make a libssl-dev virtual that is satisfied by
>> > libressl-dev on Alpine and openssl-dev on Ad=C3=A9lie.  We can use the=
 new
>> > provides_priority to accomplish this, and then we only have to
>> > soft-fork the OpenSSL package.
>> >
>> > Other ideas (that do not include dropping 32-bit architectures from
>> > Ad=C3=A9lie) are welcome.  Let's discuss.
>>
>> This sounds like good idea to me. We don't need to even wait for
>> provides_priority stuff, just use versioned provides since the two
>> packages cannot co-exist.
>>
>> provides=3D"libssl-dev=3D1" or similar for the package in aports that
>> should be used, and apk will automatically use it. And update all
>> makedepends for the new package name.
>>
>> As alternative, on Adelie, you could just do in openssl-dev
>> provides=3D"libressl-dev=3D99999" and it would be preferred over openssl=
.
>>
>> But would be nice to get rid of the package specific name and migrate
>> to 'libssl-dev' or 'ssl-dev'.
>>
>> Other thoughts?
>>
>> Timo
>
> --
> -- Kiyoshi Aman


---
Unsubscribe:  alpine-devel+unsubscribe@lists.alpinelinux.org
Help:         alpine-devel+help@lists.alpinelinux.org
---