Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2016 18:53:18 +0300 From: Pavel Timofeev <timp87@gmail.com> To: Mathieu Arnold <mat@freebsd.org> Cc: ports-list freebsd <freebsd-ports@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: [HEADSUP] change in default openssl coming Message-ID: <CAAoTqftnv75eGb3uP7gjvYkSdqfaaFRtMtjYxzcG6mDUj_uRXg@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <D13290234BD20864405FC0B2@atuin.in.mat.cc> References: <D13290234BD20864405FC0B2@atuin.in.mat.cc>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
2016-07-08 9:26 GMT+03:00 Mathieu Arnold <mat@freebsd.org>: > Hi, > > During this summer (sometime in August I think) I will be changing the > default OpenSSL for the ports tree from the base system version to > security/openssl. > > I will also, because it goes with it, change the default GSSAPI from base > to something else, I think the consensus was to use the MIT version, which > is security/krb5. > > Before I do that, it would be nice if people who actually use Kerberos (so, > that's the two of you at the back) could provide some feedback if it > changing this will break things. > > -- > Mathieu Arnold Hi! I'm sorry, if this questions already was answered: Does making base openssl private for base system components mean it will include only headers/libs (in future?)? I mean no binaries or any kind of other resources like examples/docs? I think keeping them in base will be a bit weird in such case. Also if base openssl becomes private do we need Kerberos in base?
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAAoTqftnv75eGb3uP7gjvYkSdqfaaFRtMtjYxzcG6mDUj_uRXg>