Date: Wed, 07 Aug 2002 02:04:36 -0700 From: Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com> To: Mark Murray <mark@grondar.za> Cc: arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: OpenSSL vs. -lmd Message-ID: <3D50E2A4.9EA7318F@mindspring.com> References: <3D49E41D.57DBF81C@mindspring.com> <200208070726.g777Qt1p003576@grimreaper.grondar.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Mark Murray wrote: > > If there's a port for it. [ ... ] > Please submit your port for 0.9.7-beta. Though the current OpenSSL 0.9.6e maintainer is creating one, I could; it's pretty trivial. But having a port would detract from my point that the OpenSSL in the base system needs to be severable, rather than overwritable. > > > I wonder, why you are not complaining about us having -lc in the base > > > system :-) After all, with Linux systems you usually have a choice -- > > > glibc/libc/etc. > > > > I'll complain about the resolver being in libc, if that'll make > > you happy... it'll make everyone who has to do name lookups > > serially so they compalin about IPv6 in Mozilla happy... 8-). > > Erm, complaining is the slow way to solve this. Please rather submit > patches. Patches in this area do no good. There is a hell of a lot of tradition riding on the network APIs being part of libc, and a hell of a lot of back-pressure *against* moving everything over to shared libraries and getting rid of static linking, so that the ELF library-depends-on-library actually works like it was designed to work. -- Terry To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3D50E2A4.9EA7318F>