On 10/30/2015 11:56 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
> On Fri, 30 Oct 2015 23:40:28 +0100
> hasufell wrote:
>
>> On 10/30/2015 10:16 PM, Anthony G. Basile wrote:
>>> On 10/30/15 3:35 PM, hasufell wrote:
On 10/30/2015 06:55 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
> We have no way of saying 'I prefer polarssl,
On Fri, 30 Oct 2015 18:25:14 -0400
Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 5:16 PM, Anthony G. Basile
> wrote:
> > On 10/30/15 3:35 PM, hasufell wrote:
> >>
> >> On 10/30/2015 06:55 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
> >>>
> >>> We have no way of saying 'I prefer polarssl, then gnutls, then
> >>
On Fri, 30 Oct 2015 23:40:28 +0100
hasufell wrote:
> On 10/30/2015 10:16 PM, Anthony G. Basile wrote:
> > On 10/30/15 3:35 PM, hasufell wrote:
> >> On 10/30/2015 06:55 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
> >>> We have no way of saying 'I prefer polarssl, then gnutls, then
> >>> libressl, and never openss
On Fri, 30 Oct 2015 23:40:28 +0100
hasufell wrote:
> On 10/30/2015 10:16 PM, Anthony G. Basile wrote:
> > On 10/30/15 3:35 PM, hasufell wrote:
> >> On 10/30/2015 06:55 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
> >>> We have no way of saying 'I prefer polarssl, then gnutls, then
> >>> libressl, and never openss
On 10/30/2015 10:16 PM, Anthony G. Basile wrote:
> On 10/30/15 3:35 PM, hasufell wrote:
>> On 10/30/2015 06:55 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
>>> We have no way of saying 'I prefer polarssl, then gnutls, then
>>> libressl, and never openssl'.
>> I don't think this is something that can be reasonably suppo
On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 5:16 PM, Anthony G. Basile wrote:
> On 10/30/15 3:35 PM, hasufell wrote:
>>
>> On 10/30/2015 06:55 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
>>>
>>> We have no way of saying 'I prefer polarssl, then gnutls, then
>>> libressl, and never openssl'.
>>
>> I don't think this is something that can
On 10/30/15 3:35 PM, hasufell wrote:
On 10/30/2015 06:55 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
We have no way of saying 'I prefer polarssl, then gnutls, then
libressl, and never openssl'.
I don't think this is something that can be reasonably supported and it
sounds awfully automagic. And I don't see how thi
On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 1:55 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
>>
>> The pain is for a short time. Then we have to live with this for a
>> long time. USE flags should have one meaning. The fact that this
>> isn't the case right now is already a bug. We don't need to
>> perpetuate it.
>
> No, the pain is
On 10/30/2015 06:55 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
>
> We have no way of saying 'I prefer polarssl, then gnutls, then
> libressl, and never openssl'.
I don't think this is something that can be reasonably supported and it
sounds awfully automagic. And I don't see how this is possible right
now, so I'm n
On Tue, 27 Oct 2015 22:46:35 -0400
Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 10:06 PM, hasufell wrote:
> >
> > B) 1 feature flag, 3 strict provider flags
> > * ssl: enable any sort of SSL/TLS support
> > * gnutls: only to enable gnutls provided ssl support in case there
> > is a ch
hasufell schrieb:
I've seen a lot of ebuilds lately that use 'openssl' USE flag for the
purpose of enabling ssl features. I think this should be discouraged
since it introduces inconsistency and is especially confusing for
packages like media-video/ffmpeg, where'd you expect to get ssl support
by
On 10/28/2015 09:36 AM, Alexis Ballier wrote:
> On Wed, 28 Oct 2015 03:06:59 +0100
> hasufell wrote:
>> A is not that difficult. Most uses of 'openssl' can just be replaced
>> with 'ssl', others probably with '!gnutls?' even. A few exotic ones
>> might stay and we will have to advice users to set
On Wed, 28 Oct 2015 03:06:59 +0100
hasufell wrote:
> A is not that difficult. Most uses of 'openssl' can just be replaced
> with 'ssl', others probably with '!gnutls?' even. A few exotic ones
> might stay and we will have to advice users to set USE="openssl
> libressl" instead of USE="-openssl lib
Is this not precisely what USE_EXPAND is supposed to be for? Take CURL_SSL
and make it generic...
On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 9:46 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 10:06 PM, hasufell wrote:
> >
> > B) 1 feature flag, 3 strict provider flags
> > * ssl: enable any sort of SSL/TLS sup
On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 10:06 PM, hasufell wrote:
>
> B) 1 feature flag, 3 strict provider flags
> * ssl: enable any sort of SSL/TLS support
> * gnutls: only to enable gnutls provided ssl support in case there
> is a choice
> * openssl: only to enable openssl provided ssl support in case
I've seen a lot of ebuilds lately that use 'openssl' USE flag for the
purpose of enabling ssl features. I think this should be discouraged
since it introduces inconsistency and is especially confusing for
packages like media-video/ffmpeg, where'd you expect to get ssl support
by having the global s
16 matches
Mail list logo