From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0789F138334 for ; Fri, 18 Jan 2019 23:36:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 60B45E09FD; Fri, 18 Jan 2019 23:36:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (dev.gentoo.org [IPv6:2001:470:ea4a:1:5054:ff:fec7:86e4]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 10081E0937 for ; Fri, 18 Jan 2019 23:36:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from symphony.aura-online.co.uk (154.189.187.81.in-addr.arpa [81.187.189.154]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: chewi) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0F7F7335CCD for ; Fri, 18 Jan 2019 23:36:20 +0000 (UTC) Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2019 23:36:08 +0000 From: James Le Cuirot To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Replacing binary-only SLOTs with separate packages Message-ID: <20190118233543.3da388a6@symphony.aura-online.co.uk> In-Reply-To: References: <1547842414.839.23.camel@gentoo.org> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.17.1 (GTK+ 2.24.32; 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 X-Auto-Response-Suppress: DR, RN, NRN, OOF, AutoReply MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; boundary="Sig_/N+u5H.y4NK8CErIz2o0x3Vk"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Archives-Salt: e7e18497-7a03-4b03-9992-ae3ed84abadc X-Archives-Hash: 102b8b3641923e21dce43b6f7c1ec7a0 --Sig_/N+u5H.y4NK8CErIz2o0x3Vk Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Fri, 18 Jan 2019 23:31:39 +0000 "Robin H. Johnson" wrote: > > So apparently 14.2% of dependencies allow any slot of OpenSSL which is > > most likely wrong, and 1.4% explicitly claim that's what the package > > wants. This could be valid only if e.g. the package supported multiple > > ABIs of OpenSSL libraries and used dlopen() with a few possible SONAMEs > > which I honestly doubt any of those packages is doing. =20 > > There's a valid case for accepting ANY openssl: tooling that explicitly > calls the binary tools provided by OpenSSL, and does link or dlopen any > of the openssl libraries. The binary-only SLOTs don't include those tools because they would conflict. Library-only is a more accurate term. --=20 James Le Cuirot (chewi) Gentoo Linux Developer --Sig_/N+u5H.y4NK8CErIz2o0x3Vk Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQKTBAEBCgB9FiEEUo3mvYaRpDkf2i7UIcYyEpxtfeQFAlxCYuhfFIAAAAAALgAo aXNzdWVyLWZwckBub3RhdGlvbnMub3BlbnBncC5maWZ0aGhvcnNlbWFuLm5ldDUy OERFNkJEODY5MUE0MzkxRkRBMkVENDIxQzYzMjEyOUM2RDdERTQACgkQIcYyEpxt feTTEA//eugImbwKg4EgP/9LIEXsOA/D66R8/0wFpNx+PX9V5vMAYkvsXRO2d0ot 6pQTW1Oyded5WHbj6Vq1J6F+1fHuHMt9yfnae6oPzSr+MfyOmugNITwGEEVvcf1w MCVFfEAJGEHsmmX11ORhBy4FuwrCQ50/nFdNXxf6PxV9CrroFJ+Aciq38s8dJ+lf 5rV7vHeMl6hQ36VlFtqpb1GBfDH6dqI6xKh01t1JDz8Btwr/MCWsdR5me9ebEYrS 6WJtaVHoyaS8LjB13ZRH2q8v/YEkdo9/+chFjqtzx7ZQ42Uy8l4/vxwd3Z4+5E1w jI8+IOXSC1o1nPThMW9GvNbxO62D3/kJ3/v+EG1nurMf094CiU7MNAYl8hSlGHqO OA6EvvJf80RTY9yAfefhRWt+YtU8L65dREWsHircDJHC08aGUxG2ZpTxNtbtN106 C3GkiP5ytLCctDT9E90wZ9LGeiZTKXP+d1Xq3wXw/PsoUBoa/Mb+8NvG5W5ukdOy EJM185HfmzfDvA+PqBHz5wUawSdryvKXIvWyuKVzMqUbmBJ5ZyapobkNbcOhhGPP AnhDlMzipq79yLZU2MzqMH38mCKSOKb9h7JGKU6D6215pJUYKza++1zcVbRAhm25 +R7iQokGKEKeBBV+4tb0UqfK17zwQcIf6cKdEEr1FlTHBDmQlIo= =jxXz -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/N+u5H.y4NK8CErIz2o0x3Vk--