Hi Sergei Sergei Gavrikov wrote:
> If we can have only the 3rd party crypto packages, that's good to have > different alternatives. And 2-3 alternatives is not too much :-) > > Well, as I said 'A', I will work on CYGPKG_POLARSSL. Certainly, that will > be movements only in porting and testing. I am not expert in the field of > cryptography. Great! If the PolarSSL footprint is significantly smaller than OpenSSL with an equivalent feature set configured, then your port could prove to be very useful for projects where the unmodified GPL is not an issue, or for projects where a commercial PolarSSL license makes sense. John Dallaway -- Before posting, please read the FAQ: http://ecos.sourceware.org/fom/ecos and search the list archive: http://ecos.sourceware.org/ml/ecos-discuss
