Bug#828564: sx: FTBFS with openssl 1.1.0

[Sebastian Andrzej Siewior]

On 2016-12-05 22:36:39 [+0100], László Böszörményi (GCS) wrote:
> Hi Sebastian,
Hi László,

> On Mon, Dec 5, 2016 at 10:20 PM, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
> > Okay. What do we do here? Any idea Laszlo?
> > I could try to cherry-pick the three patches into the currect 2.0 but I
> > can't look at them because the git server seems to be down at the moment.
>  I'm a bit confused to be honest. Upstream has a note that SX support
> (or the entire SX) is closed down.
Do you want to RM: it? I just want to get the ssl part fixed somehow.

> Edwin, does it mean that SX is no longer developed?

> > Upstream asked about packaging 2.3 which makes sense (I think) but there
> > is something regarding the update path If I read this correctly. And 2.3
> > works with openssl 1.1 but needs to go via NEW due to libsxclient4 and I
> > hope this "transition" is okay because libsxclient3 has no rdeps.
>  I've packaged SX 2.3 and it looks fine - the upgrade path needs
> testing. I had a plan to do it in a virtual machine (don't want to
> hurt my real data), but then I didn't have time. Now I'm on holidays
> for three days - I may need to go home sooner, but I can share the
> packaging then.

Okay. I don't want to be pushy here. If you want me to NMU it with the
SSL patches applied please say so. Otherwise I will wait for you to get
2.3 uploaded.

> Regards,
> Laszlo/GCS

Sebastian

Bug#828564: sx: FTBFS with openssl 1.1.0

[Török Edwin]

On 2016-12-05 23:36, László Böszörményi (GCS) wrote:
> Hi Sebastian,
> 
> On Mon, Dec 5, 2016 at 10:20 PM, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
>  wrote:
>> On 2016-10-09 11:38:37 [+0300], Török Edwin wrote:
>>> Patches to build with both OpenSSL 1.0.x, and 1.1.0 are available in the 
>>> upstream git repository:
>>> https://gitweb.skylable.com/gitweb/?p=sx.git;a=commitdiff;h=5acd940e97aa1f2bd1b3fdd41f4c98a5783fcb44
>>> https://gitweb.skylable.com/gitweb/?p=sx.git;a=commitdiff;h=0dcacbab63325a83668d000dc8ed7da3bf0e4f7d
>>> https://gitweb.skylable.com/gitweb/?p=sx.git;a=commitdiff;h=86e06686a5fe10fd823dff805f8439a791290c5b
>>>
>>> They apply on top of SX 2.2.
>>
>> Okay. What do we do here? Any idea Laszlo?
>> I could try to cherry-pick the three patches into the currect 2.0 but I
>> can't look at them because the git server seems to be down at the moment.
>  I'm a bit confused to be honest. Upstream has a note that SX support
> (or the entire SX) is closed down.
> Edwin, does it mean that SX is no longer developed?

SX is no longer supported commercially, but it would be nice if the last 
version (2.3) would be available in Debian (it is open-source after all)

> 
>> Upstream asked about packaging 2.3 which makes sense (I think) but there
>> is something regarding the update path If I read this correctly. And 2.3
>> works with openssl 1.1 but needs to go via NEW due to libsxclient4 and I
>> hope this "transition" is okay because libsxclient3 has no rdeps.
>  I've packaged SX 2.3 and it looks fine - the upgrade path needs
> testing. I had a plan to do it in a virtual machine (don't want to
> hurt my real data), but then I didn't have time. Now I'm on holidays
> for three days - I may need to go home sooner, but I can share the
> packaging then.

Sounds good, thanks!

Bug#828564: sx: FTBFS with openssl 1.1.0

[Török Edwin]

On 2016-12-05 23:20, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> On 2016-10-09 11:38:37 [+0300], Török Edwin wrote:
>> Dear Maintainer,
>>
>> Patches to build with both OpenSSL 1.0.x, and 1.1.0 are available in the 
>> upstream git repository:
>> https://gitweb.skylable.com/gitweb/?p=sx.git;a=commitdiff;h=5acd940e97aa1f2bd1b3fdd41f4c98a5783fcb44
>> https://gitweb.skylable.com/gitweb/?p=sx.git;a=commitdiff;h=0dcacbab63325a83668d000dc8ed7da3bf0e4f7d
>> https://gitweb.skylable.com/gitweb/?p=sx.git;a=commitdiff;h=86e06686a5fe10fd823dff805f8439a791290c5b
>>
>> They apply on top of SX 2.2.
> 
> Okay. What do we do here? Any idea Laszlo?
> I could try to cherry-pick the three patches into the currect 2.0 but I
> can't look at them because the git server seems to be down at the moment.

Sorry about that, here is a mirror (of the git repo, and those patches in 
particular):
https://github.com/enospc/sx/commit/5acd940e97aa1f2bd1b3fdd41f4c98a5783fcb44
https://github.com/enospc/sx/commit/0dcacbab63325a83668d000dc8ed7da3bf0e4f7d
https://github.com/enospc/sx/commit/86e06686a5fe10fd823dff805f8439a791290c5b

Bug#828564: sx: FTBFS with openssl 1.1.0

[GCS]

Hi Sebastian,

On Mon, Dec 5, 2016 at 10:20 PM, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
 wrote:
> On 2016-10-09 11:38:37 [+0300], Török Edwin wrote:
>> Patches to build with both OpenSSL 1.0.x, and 1.1.0 are available in the 
>> upstream git repository:
>> https://gitweb.skylable.com/gitweb/?p=sx.git;a=commitdiff;h=5acd940e97aa1f2bd1b3fdd41f4c98a5783fcb44
>> https://gitweb.skylable.com/gitweb/?p=sx.git;a=commitdiff;h=0dcacbab63325a83668d000dc8ed7da3bf0e4f7d
>> https://gitweb.skylable.com/gitweb/?p=sx.git;a=commitdiff;h=86e06686a5fe10fd823dff805f8439a791290c5b
>>
>> They apply on top of SX 2.2.
>
> Okay. What do we do here? Any idea Laszlo?
> I could try to cherry-pick the three patches into the currect 2.0 but I
> can't look at them because the git server seems to be down at the moment.
 I'm a bit confused to be honest. Upstream has a note that SX support
(or the entire SX) is closed down.
Edwin, does it mean that SX is no longer developed?

> Upstream asked about packaging 2.3 which makes sense (I think) but there
> is something regarding the update path If I read this correctly. And 2.3
> works with openssl 1.1 but needs to go via NEW due to libsxclient4 and I
> hope this "transition" is okay because libsxclient3 has no rdeps.
 I've packaged SX 2.3 and it looks fine - the upgrade path needs
testing. I had a plan to do it in a virtual machine (don't want to
hurt my real data), but then I didn't have time. Now I'm on holidays
for three days - I may need to go home sooner, but I can share the
packaging then.

Regards,
Laszlo/GCS

Bug#828564: sx: FTBFS with openssl 1.1.0

[Sebastian Andrzej Siewior]

On 2016-10-09 11:38:37 [+0300], Török Edwin wrote:
> Dear Maintainer,
> 
> Patches to build with both OpenSSL 1.0.x, and 1.1.0 are available in the 
> upstream git repository:
> https://gitweb.skylable.com/gitweb/?p=sx.git;a=commitdiff;h=5acd940e97aa1f2bd1b3fdd41f4c98a5783fcb44
> https://gitweb.skylable.com/gitweb/?p=sx.git;a=commitdiff;h=0dcacbab63325a83668d000dc8ed7da3bf0e4f7d
> https://gitweb.skylable.com/gitweb/?p=sx.git;a=commitdiff;h=86e06686a5fe10fd823dff805f8439a791290c5b
> 
> They apply on top of SX 2.2.

Okay. What do we do here? Any idea Laszlo?
I could try to cherry-pick the three patches into the currect 2.0 but I
can't look at them because the git server seems to be down at the moment.

Upstream asked about packaging 2.3 which makes sense (I think) but there
is something regarding the update path If I read this correctly. And 2.3
works with openssl 1.1 but needs to go via NEW due to libsxclient4 and I
hope this "transition" is okay because libsxclient3 has no rdeps.

any suggestions?

Sebastian

Bug#828564: sx: FTBFS with openssl 1.1.0

[Török Edwin]

Package: sx
Version: 2.0+ds-2
Followup-For: Bug #828564

Dear Maintainer,

Patches to build with both OpenSSL 1.0.x, and 1.1.0 are available in the 
upstream git repository:
https://gitweb.skylable.com/gitweb/?p=sx.git;a=commitdiff;h=5acd940e97aa1f2bd1b3fdd41f4c98a5783fcb44
https://gitweb.skylable.com/gitweb/?p=sx.git;a=commitdiff;h=0dcacbab63325a83668d000dc8ed7da3bf0e4f7d
https://gitweb.skylable.com/gitweb/?p=sx.git;a=commitdiff;h=86e06686a5fe10fd823dff805f8439a791290c5b

They apply on top of SX 2.2.

Also I've added some notes to the wiki while preparing the patch:
https://wiki.openssl.org/index.php/Talk:1.1_API_Changes

-- System Information:
Debian Release: 8.6
  APT prefers stable
  APT policy: (900, 'stable'), (500, 'testing')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)

Kernel: Linux 4.6.0-0.bpo.1-amd64 (SMP w/8 CPU cores)
Locale: LANG=C.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=C.UTF-8 (charmap=locale: Cannot set LC_ALL to 
default locale: No such file or directory
UTF-8)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash
Init: sysvinit (via /sbin/init)

Versions of packages sx depends on:
ii  libc6   2.19-18+deb8u6
ii  libcurl37.38.0-4+deb8u4
ii  libfcgi0ldbl2.4.0-8.3
ii  libfuse22.9.3-15+deb8u2
ii  libltdl72.4.2-1.11+b1
ii  libsqlite3-03.8.7.1-1+deb8u2
ii  libssl1.0.2 1.0.2j-1
ii  libsxclient32.0+ds-2
ii  libyajl22.1.0-2
ii  logrotate   3.8.7-1+b1
ii  nginx   1.9.10-1~bpo8+3
ii  nginx-full [nginx]  1.9.10-1~bpo8+3
ii  openssl 1.0.2j-1~bpo8+1
pn  python:any  
ii  zlib1g  1:1.2.8.dfsg-2+b1

sx recommends no packages.

sx suggests no packages.

-- debconf information excluded

Bug#828564: sx: FTBFS with openssl 1.1.0

[Kurt Roeckx]

Source: sx
Version: 2.0+ds-2
Severity: important
Control: block 827061 by -1

Hi,

OpenSSL 1.1.0 is about to released.  During a rebuild of all packages using
OpenSSL this package fail to build.  A log of that build can be found at:
https://breakpoint.cc/openssl-1.1-rebuild-2016-05-29/Attempted/sx_2.0+ds-2_amd64-20160529-1542

On https://wiki.openssl.org/index.php/1.1_API_Changes you can see various of the
reasons why it might fail.  There are also updated man pages at
https://www.openssl.org/docs/manmaster/ that should contain useful information.

There is a libssl-dev package available in experimental that contains a recent
snapshot, I suggest you try building against that to see if everything works.

If you have problems making things work, feel free to contact us.


Kurt