On Sun, Sep 04, 2005 at 07:47:15PM +1000, Paul TBBle Hampson wrote:
It may be worthwhile to simply survey all the curl-using packages in
sarge, though, and find out if there is a non-zero number of them that
need SSL_CTX_FUNCTION. If *not*, then I don't think there's much sense
in going
On Sat, Sep 03, 2005 at 05:02:14AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
On Sat, Sep 03, 2005 at 08:16:48AM +1000, Paul TBBle Hampson wrote:
As far as packaging goes, this means you get the following packages:
libcurl3, providing libcurl3-openssl (linked against OpenSSL to avoid
breaking
sarge
FWIW, I've started work on implementing the solution outlined in
http://curl.haxx.se/legal/distro-dilemma.html. However, my spare time is
very limited, so I can't promise anything about when (or even whether) I
can finish this.
Richard
--
__ _
|_) /| Richard Atterer | GnuPG key:
On Sat, Sep 03, 2005 at 08:16:48AM +1000, Paul TBBle Hampson wrote:
As far as packaging goes, this means you get the following packages:
libcurl3, providing libcurl3-openssl (linked against OpenSSL to avoid breaking
sarge packages that use this functionality)
libcurl3-gnutls (linked
On Fri, Sep 02, 2005 at 04:04:27AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
On Fri, Sep 02, 2005 at 12:24:18PM +0200, Domenico Andreoli wrote:
- libcurl3 (GnuTLS, soname: libcurl.so.3)
So the libcurl3 in sarge and etch will have ABI incompatibilities?
at the release time of etch
On Sat, Sep 03, 2005 at 04:12:43PM +0200, Domenico Andreoli wrote:
On Fri, Sep 02, 2005 at 04:04:27AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
On Fri, Sep 02, 2005 at 12:24:18PM +0200, Domenico Andreoli wrote:
- libcurl3 (GnuTLS, soname: libcurl.so.3)
So the libcurl3 in sarge and
On Aug 30, Daniel Stenberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In my view, there's only one available work-around for the short to mid
term, and that is to use a separate .so file for libcurl built with GnuTLS.
We know that in the long term we want to use gnutls. So why should it
not be the default for
On Thu, Sep 01, 2005 at 09:40:17PM +0200, Elimar Riesebieter wrote:
On Tue, 30 Aug 2005 the mental interface of Daniel Stenberg told:
The problem you have with libcurl and OpenSSL/GnuTLS is not strictly an
upstream problem.
In the curl project there are some ideas floating around
* Domenico Andreoli [Fri, 02 Sep 2005 11:16:28 +0200]:
- libcurl3-dev (OpenSSL, depends: libssl-dev)
- libcurl3-openssl-dev (GnuTLS, depends: libgnutls-dev)
Obvious typo/whatever here, right?
- libcurl3 (GnuTLS, soname: libcurl.so.3)
So the libcurl3 in sarge
On Fri, Sep 02, 2005 at 11:16:28AM +0200, Domenico Andreoli wrote:
ok, we are hooked into the libflac6 transition, let's start the curl one.
my wish is to upload curl 7.14.1 with the following package layout:
- curl (OpenSSL, linked to libcurl-openssl.so.3)
- libcurl3
On Fri, Sep 02, 2005 at 11:56:13AM +0200, Adeodato Simó wrote:
* Domenico Andreoli [Fri, 02 Sep 2005 11:16:28 +0200]:
- libcurl3 (GnuTLS, soname: libcurl.so.3)
So the libcurl3 in sarge and etch will have ABI incompatibilities?
If done right, I see no reason this should be
On Fri, Sep 02, 2005 at 02:58:05AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
On Fri, Sep 02, 2005 at 11:16:28AM +0200, Domenico Andreoli wrote:
ok, we are hooked into the libflac6 transition, let's start the curl one.
my wish is to upload curl 7.14.1 with the following package layout:
- curl
On Fri, Sep 02, 2005 at 11:56:13AM +0200, Adeodato Simó wrote:
* Domenico Andreoli [Fri, 02 Sep 2005 11:16:28 +0200]:
- libcurl3-dev (OpenSSL, depends: libssl-dev)
- libcurl3-openssl-dev (GnuTLS, depends: libgnutls-dev)
Obvious typo/whatever here, right?
On Fri, Sep 02,
On Fri, Sep 02, 2005 at 12:24:18PM +0200, Domenico Andreoli wrote:
- libcurl3 (GnuTLS, soname: libcurl.so.3)
So the libcurl3 in sarge and etch will have ABI incompatibilities?
at the release time of etch this problem will regard only
external software. this kind of
On Fri, Sep 02, 2005 at 04:04:27AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
On Fri, Sep 02, 2005 at 12:24:18PM +0200, Domenico Andreoli wrote:
- libcurl3 (GnuTLS, soname: libcurl.so.3)
But no one has yet answered my question: *why* are there ABI differences
between the gnutls and openssl
On Sep 02, Paul TBBle Hampson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If I've understood correctly, it is because curl expects the client program
or library to -lgnutls or -lopenssl and therefore provide the SSL symbols
to match the symbols which that build of the .so file is expecting.
I hope not, this
On Fri, Sep 02, 2005 at 04:04:27AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
But no one has yet answered my question: *why* are there ABI
differences between the gnutls and openssl builds?
To the best of my knowledge (I could be wrong), ATM the only ABI difference
is that when OpenSSL is used,
On Fri, Sep 02, 2005 at 06:51:20PM +0200, Richard Atterer wrote:
On Fri, Sep 02, 2005 at 04:04:27AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
But no one has yet answered my question: *why* are there ABI
differences between the gnutls and openssl builds?
To the best of my knowledge (I could be wrong),
Hi
The problem you have with libcurl and OpenSSL/GnuTLS is not strictly an
upstream problem.
In the curl project there are some ideas floating around that are being
discussed on how this could be fixed for Debian (and other distros) but that
is only because they don't do it themselves, it
Hi all,
I bounced this message to debian-devel to force a solution with the
curl ssl/gnutlds diverties.
On Tue, 30 Aug 2005 the mental interface of
Daniel Stenberg told:
Hi
The problem you have with libcurl and OpenSSL/GnuTLS is not strictly an
upstream problem.
In the curl project
On Thu, 1 Sep 2005, Elimar Riesebieter wrote:
I bounced this message to debian-devel to force a solution with the
curl ssl/gnutlds diverties.
...
My resume on Daniels point of view is to get a different .so name for gnutls
in the very short term and kick off ssl in Debian apps midterm!
21 matches
Mail list logo
