On Mon, Mar 18, 2019 at 8:56 PM Richard Purdie
wrote:
> On Mon, 2019-03-18 at 16:52 -0700, Andre McCurdy wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 18, 2019 at 4:35 PM Richard Purdie
> > wrote:
> > > I went to have a look at how this upstream C utility was going and
> > > found that they've moved to github issues
On Mon, 2019-03-18 at 16:52 -0700, Andre McCurdy wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 18, 2019 at 4:35 PM Richard Purdie
> wrote:
> > I went to have a look at how this upstream C utility was going and
> > found that they've moved to github issues and there is no such
> > issue
> > open.
>
> It's already been
On Mon, Mar 18, 2019 at 4:35 PM Richard Purdie
wrote:
>
> I went to have a look at how this upstream C utility was going and
> found that they've moved to github issues and there is no such issue
> open.
It's already been implemented and is present in openssl 1.1.0:
On Mon, 2019-03-18 at 10:36 -0300, Otavio Salvador wrote:
> We had a c_rehash shell re-implementation being used for the native
> package and there is no reason to not use it as well for the
> target. This allows it to be available without the need of perl being
> installed.
>
> This partially
Hello Richard,
On Mon, Mar 18, 2019 at 8:18 PM Richard Purdie
wrote:
...
> I think the commit message could use some work but IMO this patch
> probably is worth it for OE.
What do you think I could improve on it?
--
Otavio Salvador O.S. Systems
I was asked for my views on this thread.
OE is primarily targeting embedded systems and removing a perl
dependency from target is something we do care about and a significant
win.
As such I'm tempted to merge this patch in for that reason. The fact
we're successfully using it at rootfs time is
It’s fine to use the shell rewrite in the native case, as it’s only used from
one place under our control. This is not the case for the target where we have
no idea where and how the script can be used. So you can’t argue that native
has the same issues as target does, and therefore they must
Hello Alexander,
On Mon, Mar 18, 2019 at 11:53 AM Alexander Kanavin
wrote:
>
> Apologies, but I still have to veto this. The concerns I expressed previously
> still stand.
>
> The best course of action would be to work with the OpenSSL upstream to
> replace the utility with either C or shell
Apologies, but I still have to veto this. The concerns I expressed previously
still stand.
The best course of action would be to work with the OpenSSL upstream to replace
the utility with either C or shell version.
Alex
> On 18 Mar 2019, at 14.36, Otavio Salvador wrote:
>
> We had a
We had a c_rehash shell re-implementation being used for the native
package and there is no reason to not use it as well for the
target. This allows it to be available without the need of perl being
installed.
This partially reverts OE-Core:d2b1a889ef (openssl: move c_rehash pkg
to avoid perl
10 matches
Mail list logo
