[this is re: https://marc.info/?l=openbsd-tech&m=160673147428172&w=2]
On 2021/04/12 13:25, Todd C. Miller wrote: > This is a bit of a mess. LibreSSL portable puts the LibreSSL version > number in the pc files. In-tree LibreSSL uses 1.0.0 which is clearly > wrong--using SHLIB_VERSION_NUMBER for the version makes absolutely > no sense to me. The pc files used by OpenSSL also use the release > version. The simplest thing would be for us to use the LibreSSL > version too. > > For third-party code that uses "pkg-config --atleast-version=foo", > it might be more useful to list what version of OpenSSL we are > "compatible" with but I don't think that is really workable since > there is no one-to-one comparison. My preference would be to just > extract the version from LIBRESSL_VERSION_TEXT in opensslv.h. > > - todd That sounds reasonable. I also found https://marc.info/?l=openbsd-tech&m=149244066604660&w=2 suggesting the same approach with LIBRESSL_VERSION_TEXT (and a 2015 mail of mine with a related problem). I don't really expect problems (and can do ports tests at least on i386) but for safety let's look at this after unlock.
