Hi, On 04/14/2014 10:28 AM, Gert Doering wrote: > On Mon, Apr 14, 2014 at 11:13:24AM +0300, Samuli Seppänen wrote: >> Currently all of the binary builds we provide[*] are linked to OpenSSL. >> Would having both OpenSSL and PolarSSL builds make sense (e.g. starting >> with 2.4)? > > I think it would be a nice option. We could even start with 2.3.4 with > that, at least for windows... (if PolarSSL can be cross-compiled for > windows...)
PolarSSL works just fine on Windows, OpenVPN-NL already ships for Windows, using PolarSSL. I would really like to release 'vanilla' polarssl-builds too. Make it easy for people to pick their favourite SSL library. However, what about PolarSSL itself? For Windows we just put it in the installer. But what about the other platforms? It's less commonly available in the distro's, and because of the (at least up to now) volatile API's, the rather not unlikely that users get version clashes. So, options: * Just supply openvpn builds, let users deal with polarssl versioning themselves * Provide PolarSSL packages too (do we already do that for other libs?) * Statically compile in PolarSSL (like OpenVPN-NL does) I think providing PolarSSL packages too is the neatest, but I'm not sure on the work involved in maintaining those. Samuli, any thoughts on this? -Steffan
