Ken Moffat wrote:
I will be committing this shortly. This post is an explanation for some of my decisions about the markup.I am aware that some people update _everything_ in their current system, for a rolling release. I'm not one of those people. I'm also aware that some people never update package versions in their build - I regard that as silly, and perhaps dangerous. Me, I build a (desktop) system, use it as my main system for a while, and then eventually build a newer system. But I try to keep my older systems, particularly released LFS/BLFS versions, usable for some time - at a minimum, my kernels should be using recent versions from a still-supported version (or current -rc, with possible breakage!), and firefox or xulrunner should be current. So, I have minimally-usable versions of LFS 7.{0,1,2,3,4} although some things (particularly gnome and any kde apps) are not maintained. With firefox-31.0, the Python part of the build system breaks if HTTPSHandler is not found. That happens if you build Python-2 before openssl, which is what I have been doing for a few years (never build a package until it is likely to be useful!).
Personally, openssl is almost always the first major package I build. openssh is the second (for scripting purposes I build 'lsb-release' and 'which' first). Generally I build almost everything via ssh. For that reason, I've never run into the above problem.
Normally,
we would just xref other packages. In this case, any recent version of openssl fits the bill, so I have chosen my wording with care and I will be very annoyed if anyone gratuitously changes it to imply that only the current version of openssl is usable.
Seems reasonable. I haven't seen your change, but I hope you mention the security issues openssl has had recently. AFAIK, only the current (as of today) version of openssl should be used.
-- Bruce -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
