From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B1A01387FD for ; Wed, 11 Jun 2014 13:45:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 6348AE0B5E; Wed, 11 Jun 2014 13:45:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 885ACE0B26 for ; Wed, 11 Jun 2014 13:45:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pomiot.lan (77-253-145-159.adsl.inetia.pl [77.253.145.159]) (using SSLv3 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: mgorny) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9BCAD34008F; Wed, 11 Jun 2014 13:45:43 +0000 (UTC) Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2014 15:45:37 +0200 From: =?ISO-8859-2?B?TWljaGGzIEfzcm55?= To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Cc: chithanh@gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Creating a USE_EXPAND for ssl providers Message-ID: <20140611154537.010bef0e@pomiot.lan> In-Reply-To: <539859F2.3020805@gentoo.org> References: <53877169.3010800@gentoo.org> <539839A6.9090509@gentoo.org> <20140611151231.304f1f30@pomiot.lan> <539859F2.3020805@gentoo.org> Organization: Gentoo X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.9.3 (GTK+ 2.24.23; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; boundary="Sig_/3vDaZe8McRh3KptPQMD4o+2"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Archives-Salt: 14da208c-ac5f-4730-9075-f29912e74048 X-Archives-Hash: 4507c38ba4a1052925d0d2aa6855a5f6 --Sig_/3vDaZe8McRh3KptPQMD4o+2 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Dnia 2014-06-11, o godz. 15:30:26 Ch=C3=AD-Thanh Christopher Nguy=E1=BB=85n napisa=C5= =82(a): > > 3. There is no clean way of enforcing SSL provider match between > > packages. Wasn't this thread initially about curl and rtmpdump > > requiring matching flags? >=20 > It could be enforced if an eclass does the actual choice of crypto > provider in a reproducible way. That would be not trivial though. No, it can't. Let's say package A depends on package B and requires the same SSL provider. A has 'openssl gnutls' B has 'openssl gnutls polarssl' Now let's say the eclass prefers polarssl over the other two. How are you going to make A dep on B? --=20 Best regards, Micha=C5=82 G=C3=B3rny --Sig_/3vDaZe8McRh3KptPQMD4o+2 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQJ8BAEBCgBmBQJTmF2BXxSAAAAAAC4AKGlzc3Vlci1mcHJAbm90YXRpb25zLm9w ZW5wZ3AuZmlmdGhob3JzZW1hbi5uZXQ2REJCMDdDQzRGMERBRDA2RUEwQUZFNDFC MDdBMUFFQUVGQjQ0NjRFAAoJELB6GurvtEZOeNgP+wdxNOmtxgSmHp3L7S3IYJmt lJ+wutHsF5f3NsiDCIe/5JnhorT4rCDFINJG9K5ZawrYFYeIffxXVrtPdUU7QIWd yCdeB0cF9V+WcPkpCFbwpbJceoE0li6DGFfV/Dn0K/ksFdO989E2y7QUfHB4KMyw YkAOpWAXA2gn6UGYQuN/EwH6iH5Z5vGYkBrIgofkszkVhlG4rl+ybPtCp7I63gP2 9a1pyPPUHQU4MyY5uMA5fELVzij4gaEdSLkcDQ9JdsSBON+hlbHO77meBfQfLBmp ES6ypMcYxbh4jcm1zxwsv0ZNE8XfcgBr+7uMPkof8729sW9Hw3i5VY6NlxlmqOy5 XGLLpMLgyq+pLso6tqKGXcciZYyvylfaGAf3H10mXiaPYCrrW53OoGLLHmwhGR8l dxP/DbwXcVtN0K3xYQHBNsvooKc4ylvWbDn9QL7LS+zmrygxWmYdyQ5hGzLacFjA DTGBsWwBWASuI5vAqzYEKz7n5/ctS/JJT4fONGt6utcznTLfvjPLGRIkYqp5g1DE mna3ux9KjhGmxfP4NZ+m1zM4gzbYWNCu1xuEG8bOPZuZkUAuARrAMeIRhUzSwTRE VqVwhLnhGrv90t599j/KncLugfdMnXVDuI+1U5J2BHTC44Y1rePev+0He24fQZ3K M9VPgTCI3MRzTEdHBCjK =+EEN -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/3vDaZe8McRh3KptPQMD4o+2--