# IRC Discussion on freenode (#ubuntu-devel) [11:46:46] <xnox> slashd, jamespage - what am i missing about https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ceph/+bug/1822872 ? =) [11:46:47] <ubottu>Launchpad bug 1822872 in ceph (Ubuntu Bionic) "Bionic: Luminous radosgw incompatible with libssl1.1" [Medium,Confirmed] [11:47:10] <xnox> slashd, jamespage - libssl/libcrypto 1.0 and 1.1 are coinstallable and both are support in bionic, in main from now and until forever. [11:47:13] <xnox> so what's broken? [11:48:41] <xnox> slashd, jamespage - sound slike load_dll should be dll opening libcrypto.so.1.0 if that's what it expects? [11:50:30] <xnox> slashd, jamespage - imho we should builddepend on libssl1.0 and set CIVETWEB_SSL_SSL_LIB and CIVETWEB_SSL_CRYPTO_LIB to versioned sonames of libssl.so.1.0 and libcrypto.so.1.0 [11:52:38] <jamespage> xnox, slashd: tbh I think that's fine [11:52:57] <jamespage> I'm easy either way - slashd are you ok to SRU that? [11:53:21] <slashd> jamespage, yeah I can SRU the libssl-dev downgrade to 1.0 [11:53:31] <xnox>jamespage, well reading the code, it sounds slightly harder. cause WITH_RADOSGW tries to build with SSL_INCLUDE_DIR [11:54:35] <xnox>slashd, if it works. cause it does look that radosgw, rgw, civetweb all need to use libssl1.0-dev then. [11:55:11] <xnox>slashd, ah, and that's all that does ssl there, so it's fine. [12:04:48] <xnox> slashd, and we reverted and forced to use libssl1.0-dev with nodejs 8 in bionic [12:05:01] <xnox> slashd, and one should use libssl-dev (aka 1.1) with nodejs in disco.
-- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1822872 Title: Bionic: Luminous radosgw incompatible with libssl1.1 To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ceph/+bug/1822872/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
