On 04/09/2015 11:53, Christian Weisgerber wrote: > Baptiste Daroussin: > >> Some how you have mixed up things between base openssl and libressl, when >> starting to activate libressl if you are using ports only you have to be >> extra >> careful, (same goes with ncurses or ports openssl) just installing those >> ports >> is enough to "pollute" nearly anything you build after with a dependency on >> it >> (well anything that does link to libssl, libcrypto) > > Well, yes, that's what I said. It's a bug. > >> If it very complicated and >> error prone to cherry pick "only take base openssl here, only ports openssl >> there" the only "safe" way to solve this situation and being consistent is to >> always skip the version from base and enforce the version for ports. (the >> otherway around is impossible - very complicated) > > And the addition of LibreSSL as a not-quite-equivalent alternative > to ports OpenSSL makes this even more complicated. You can expect > things coming out of OpenBSD (like new versions of net/openntpd) > to require LibreSSL, because it includes a new library libtls that > doesn't exist in OpenSSL. In the meantime, LibreSSL has removed > some of the more horrific APIs of OpenSSL, which means some ports > will not build against LibreSSL as is. Like python27. Fixes for > these problems can be picked from the OpenBSD ports tree, if we > want to. >
Many problem reports with patches are filed already just waiting for committers and are summarized here: https://wiki.freebsd.org/LibreSSL It would be great to get at least the python27 patch committed. _______________________________________________ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"