"We are currently exploring defining a fake `boringssl` local_repository which has a single target (`@boringssl//:ssl` which points to system provided openssl)"
This actually sounds ideal to me. Compare what the protobuf repo does about Python headers <https://github.com/protocolbuffers/protobuf/blob/2e51ad6344111db2e1c38e1c4b78eac5f2029d17/util/python/BUILD#L3>. If you come up with a robust repository rule to pull in the system openssl, consider making it available as an example. I imagine it will be useful to many besides yourself. On Tuesday, March 3, 2020 at 3:30:35 PM UTC-8 priy...@gmail.com wrote: > Hello, > > I am trying to compile GRPC without BoringSSL. Looks like this is > supported via cmake. Is there a way to also support it via Bazel? My > current understanding is that the Bazel build unconditionally depends on > @boringssl//:ssl. > > We are using Bazel to build a custom binary that links in aws-cpp-sdk and > grpc. It seems like aws-cpp-sdk wants openssl while grpc seems to want > boringssl. We are currently exploring defining a fake `boringssl` > local_repository which has a single target (`@boringssl//:ssl` which points > to system provided openssl). Would love to know if this is likely to be a > fool's errand. > > Regards! > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "grpc.io" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to grpc-io+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/grpc-io/e8d97291-f292-444a-85c5-10eb94883bf4%40googlegroups.com.
