From owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Tue Oct 25 22:14:18 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4A0A8C21B5E for ; Tue, 25 Oct 2016 22:14:18 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from truckman@FreeBSD.org) Received: from gw.catspoiler.org (unknown [IPv6:2602:304:b010:ef20::f2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "gw.catspoiler.org", Issuer "gw.catspoiler.org" (not verified)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0D645E22 for ; Tue, 25 Oct 2016 22:14:18 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from truckman@FreeBSD.org) Received: from FreeBSD.org (mousie.catspoiler.org [192.168.101.2]) by gw.catspoiler.org (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id u9PME6br070248; Tue, 25 Oct 2016 15:14:11 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from truckman@FreeBSD.org) Message-Id: <201610252214.u9PME6br070248@gw.catspoiler.org> Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2016 15:14:06 -0700 (PDT) From: Don Lewis Subject: Re: lighttpd does not pull OpenSSL dependency To: mad@madpilot.net cc: demelier.david@gmail.com, freebsd-ports@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/plain; charset=us-ascii X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2016 22:14:18 -0000 On 24 Oct, Guido Falsi wrote: > On 10/24/16 16:28, David Demelier wrote: >> 2016-10-24 14:59 GMT+02:00 Guido Falsi : >>> Are you generating your own packages? What software are you using to do >>> that? >> >> Yes, I'm using poudriere. However I didn't upgrade poudriere for a >> while, maybe I should upgrade it too. The bulk build was clean at time >> I ran it, since it was an upgrade no packages were existing. > > It culd be related. It's at least worth a try. > >> >>> Are you using some directive to enable ports provided ssl library? >> >> If you mean some tunables in the make.conf files, no. >> >>> So I'd conclude there's something wrong affecting your builds. What >>> about a stray installation of a ports provided ssl library somewhere? >> >> I'm not sure to understand your question. The bulk build was clean (no >> package existing), I'll double check this evening if removing the >> lighttpd package to force a rebuild will fix that. >> > > I see but for some reason the port, while building, picked up a ports > provided openssl library, it had to be there somehow for the port to > pick that up. > > I have no idea how it could be there though. I don't think it is a package problem. I suspect that the runtime linker is picking up libssl from ports because it is detected first in the linker's search path. Then the question is, if DEFAULT_VERSIONS+=ssl=openssl is not in make.conf, then why is OpeSSL from ports installed? Nothing should be depending on it. If you do want to use OpenSSL from ports, then setting DEFAULT_VERSIONS+=ssl=openssl in make.conf and rebuilding all the packages that use ssl so that everything is consistent is the way to go. In that case, I think lighttpd will have its dependency on openssl from ports recorded. If you go that route, you'll run into problems with any ports that use GSSAPI and/or Kerberos, since using GSSAPI and/or Kerberos from base doesn't work when using OpenSSL from ports. Since I don't use GSSAPI here, I added this to make.conf for building packages: OPTIONS_SET=GSSAPI_NONE KRB_NONE OPTIONS_UNSET=GSSAPI_BASE KRB_BASE If you do need GSSAPI, then GSSAPI_HEIMDAL and GSSAPI_MIT are the other possible options. Ditto for Kerberos.