*snip*
> No. We are talking about removing a GPL infected library from the base
> tree that is used by a couple of utterly performance irrelevant utilities
> and making these couple of utilities (secure-rpc key generation tools)
> use the OpenSSL bignum API - where OpenSSL has a BSD-style license
GH wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 21, 2001 at 01:15:12PM -0700, some SMTP stream spewed forth:
> > On Tue, Jun 19, 2001 at 12:44:40PM -0700, Terry Lambert wrote:
> > > Giorgos Keramidas wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Sun, Jun 17, 2001 at 01:51:56PM -0700, Kris Kennaway wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > libbn is alread
On Thu, Jun 21, 2001 at 01:15:12PM -0700, some SMTP stream spewed forth:
> On Tue, Jun 19, 2001 at 12:44:40PM -0700, Terry Lambert wrote:
> > Giorgos Keramidas wrote:
> > >
> > > On Sun, Jun 17, 2001 at 01:51:56PM -0700, Kris Kennaway wrote:
> > >
> > > > libbn is already part of OpenSSH; it's
On Tue, Jun 19, 2001 at 12:44:40PM -0700, Terry Lambert wrote:
> Giorgos Keramidas wrote:
> >
> > On Sun, Jun 17, 2001 at 01:51:56PM -0700, Kris Kennaway wrote:
> >
> > > libbn is already part of OpenSSH; it's a trivial matter to make it
^^^
I meant to say Open
> No, I'm saying that the author of the SRA patches did the right thing
> and used the traditional BSD math library when extending the
> traditional BSD telnet utility. I am furthermore making the point
> that FreeBSD should continue to ship with a library that provides
> the `libmp' interface, r
< said:
> But telnet in historic BSD didn't have sra or any other authentication
> mechanism that uses libmp. Or are you saying that we cannot change
> `historical BSD software'?
No, I'm saying that the author of the SRA patches did the right thing
and used the traditional BSD math library when
Garrett Wollman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> < said:
>
> > telnet* should never have used libmp in the first place,
>
> Yes, it should have, since telnet is historic BSD software and libmp
> is the historic BSD arbitrary-precision-math library.
But telnet in historic BSD didn't have sra or any
< said:
> telnet* should never have used libmp in the first place,
Yes, it should have, since telnet is historic BSD software and libmp
is the historic BSD arbitrary-precision-math library. That is also
(one reason) why we should continue to supply a libmp, regardless of
what code it is actuall
On Sun, Jun 17, 2001 at 01:51:56PM -0700, Kris Kennaway wrote:
> libbn is already part of OpenSSH; it's a trivial matter to make it
> into a standalone library. In other words, we already include two
> functionally equivalent bignum libraries in FreeBSD, so one of them
> should go.
I couldn't a
On Sun, Jun 17, 2001 at 06:22:56PM +0300, Giorgos Keramidas wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 16, 2001 at 11:38:45PM -0700, Peter Wemm wrote:
>
> > It should not be too hard to have build a lightweight 'libbignum' that
> > is extracted from the openssl sources and make that available in the base
> > system.
On Sun, Jun 17, 2001 at 11:48:41AM -0400, Joseph A. Mallett wrote:
> > If we do need some of the functionality of libgmp in the base-system,
> > then we really should import some newer version of libgmp, instead of
> > trying to make our own new library. I dont really like reinventing
> > wheels
On Sun, 17 Jun 2001, Giorgos Keramidas wrote:
>
> If we do need some of the functionality of libgmp in the base-system,
> then we really should import some newer version of libgmp, instead of
> trying to make our own new library. I dont really like reinventing
> wheels :)
>
Unless you are the on
On Sat, Jun 16, 2001 at 11:38:45PM -0700, Peter Wemm wrote:
> It should not be too hard to have build a lightweight 'libbignum' that
> is extracted from the openssl sources and make that available in the base
> system. It would not be hard to convert the lib*mp consumers to use the
> libbignum (
Steve Kargl wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 17, 2001 at 05:48:48AM +0300, Giorgos Keramidas wrote:
> >
> > I dont seem to be able to find some part of the base system that
> > actually *does* use libgmp. Being out of date as it is, do you think
> > it's proper to remove it from the base system and make it
On Sun, Jun 17, 2001 at 05:48:48AM +0300, Giorgos Keramidas wrote:
>
> I dont seem to be able to find some part of the base system that
> actually *does* use libgmp. Being out of date as it is, do you think
> it's proper to remove it from the base system and make it a port?
>
It is a port. Se
I was looking at PR/9233 from Dec 1998 the other day, and I saw that
the version of libgmp thats included in the base-system seems to be
very outdated (version 2.x in our tree, while version 3.x is available
at the homepage of libgmp).
After discussing this with [EMAIL PROTECTED] about it through
16 matches
Mail list logo