Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2018 12:57:33 +0100 From: Franco Fichtner <franco@lastsummer.de> To: Eugene Grosbein <eugen@grosbein.net> Cc: Mathieu Arnold <mat@FreeBSD.org>, FreeBSD Mailing List <freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>, portmgr@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ssl=base Message-ID: <BE734A99-263D-4677-AE92-100BA0FF93F2@lastsummer.de> In-Reply-To: <b599559b-8c82-523d-fece-348d1cf4e22e@grosbein.net> References: <6a506622-f08b-3e52-52c4-3eb63147c328@grosbein.net> <20181125114601.b56stbs5nr64mhkv@atuin.in.mat.cc> <b599559b-8c82-523d-fece-348d1cf4e22e@grosbein.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> On 25. Nov 2018, at 12:51 PM, Eugene Grosbein <eugen@grosbein.net> = wrote: >=20 > Why can't you use LibreSSL port for some ports and base libssl for = other ports? > That is, net/mpd5 links with base system libfetch that depends on base = libssl, > so it is example of port that cannot be built with LibreSSL. FWIW, since 2015 we've had no build or operational issue with mpd5 for = LibreSSL from ports. If the issue is mixed linkling between base and ports, it's not that = LibreSSL fails but rather any combination of base and ports, on FreeBSD 12 even = between 1.1.1 and 1.0.2. On 11 that wasn't really an issue because base OpenSSL = and ports OpenSSL were the same so I can understand where the the idea of = "breakage" for LibreSSL specifically comes from. Cheers, Franco
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?BE734A99-263D-4677-AE92-100BA0FF93F2>