Bug#859826: xca: Please migrate to openssl1.1 in Buster
Hi, this is a remainder about the openssl transition [0]. We really want to remove libssl1.0-dev from unstable for Buster. I will raise the severity of this bug to serious in a month. Please react before that happens. [0] https://bugs.debian.org/871056#55 Sebastian
Bug#859826: xca: Please migrate to openssl1.1 in Buster
On 2017-04-10 14:23:42 [+0200], Tino Mettler wrote: > Hi, Hi, > I didn't want to state that there are no successors in 1.1. It's just > that the accessors work differently, and making XCA build with 1.0 and > 1.1 results in a little #ifdef hell. Another annoyance was that the > OpenSSL documentation was somewhat behind at least last year, and the > web server was in some sort of reorganisation, resulting in a lot if > 404 errors. The recommended way https://wiki.openssl.org/index.php/OpenSSL_1.1.0_Changes is to provide the accessors like RSA_set0_key() via ifdef for older openssl versions (older than 1.1.0) and then use it in the source code without any ifdefs. > I'll ask upstream about the current state. great. > Regards, > Tino Sebastian
Bug#859826: xca: Please migrate to openssl1.1 in Buster
On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 13:21:18 +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: > On 2017-04-10 12:09:39 [+0200], Tino Mettler wrote: > > Hi, > Hi, > > > I already talked to upstream about this last year during the "OpenSSL > > 1.0 vs. 1.1 in Stretch" discussion. XCA makes use of many data that is > > not available in 1.1 anymore, making a migration non-trivial. > > please get upstream of xca to talk to openssl's upstream to make them > aware of the situation and hopefully openssl upstream will add them > accessors. Hi, I didn't want to state that there are no successors in 1.1. It's just that the accessors work differently, and making XCA build with 1.0 and 1.1 results in a little #ifdef hell. Another annoyance was that the OpenSSL documentation was somewhat behind at least last year, and the web server was in some sort of reorganisation, resulting in a lot if 404 errors. I'll ask upstream about the current state. Regards, Tino
Bug#859826: xca: Please migrate to openssl1.1 in Buster
On 2017-04-10 12:09:39 [+0200], Tino Mettler wrote: > Hi, Hi, > I already talked to upstream about this last year during the "OpenSSL > 1.0 vs. 1.1 in Stretch" discussion. XCA makes use of many data that is > not available in 1.1 anymore, making a migration non-trivial. please get upstream of xca to talk to openssl's upstream to make them aware of the situation and hopefully openssl upstream will add them accessors. > Regards, > Tino Sebastian
Bug#859826: xca: Please migrate to openssl1.1 in Buster
On Fri, Apr 07, 2017 at 18:41:02 +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: > Package: xca > Version: 1.3.2-2 > Severity: important > Tags: sid buster > User: pkg-openssl-de...@lists.alioth.debian.org > Usertags: openssl-1.1-trans > > Please migrate to libssl-dev in the Buster cycle. The bug report about > the FTBFS is #828604. The log of the FTBFS can be found at > > https://breakpoint.cc/openssl-1.1-rebuild-2016-05-29/Attempted/xca_1.3.2-1_amd64-20160529-1554 Hi, I already talked to upstream about this last year during the "OpenSSL 1.0 vs. 1.1 in Stretch" discussion. XCA makes use of many data that is not available in 1.1 anymore, making a migration non-trivial. Regards, Tino
Bug#859826: xca: Please migrate to openssl1.1 in Buster
Package: xca Version: 1.3.2-2 Severity: important Tags: sid buster User: pkg-openssl-de...@lists.alioth.debian.org Usertags: openssl-1.1-trans Please migrate to libssl-dev in the Buster cycle. The bug report about the FTBFS is #828604. The log of the FTBFS can be found at https://breakpoint.cc/openssl-1.1-rebuild-2016-05-29/Attempted/xca_1.3.2-1_amd64-20160529-1554 Sebastian
