Date: Sun, 20 Feb 2000 01:05:07 -0500 From: Garance A Drosihn <drosih@rpi.edu> To: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@zippy.cdrom.com>, Kris Kennaway <kris@FreeBSD.ORG> Cc: Doug Barton <Doug@gorean.org>, Victor Salaman <salaman@teknos.com>, freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: openssl in -current Message-ID: <v04210106b4d5331b3e73@[128.113.24.47]> In-Reply-To: <42178.951019790@zippy.cdrom.com> References: <42178.951019790@zippy.cdrom.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At 8:09 PM -0800 2/19/00, Jordan K. Hubbard wrote: > > Having _a_ general-purpose cryptography toolkit in the base system allows > > us to add in all sorts of cool things to FreeBSD (https support for fetch, > > openssh, random cryptographic enhancements elsewhere). OpenSSL just > > happens to be the only decent freely-available (BSDL) toolkit. > >And I still think that this is a reasonable objective, the current >gymnastics for making it happen making me wonder whether or not that >would not be an objective better moved to sometime in September. This will be a lot easier once the patent expires. We would probably be better off sticking with the ports-version until then, so we don't have to delay 4.0-release until all the issues are sorted out. If 4.0 is delayed, I want it delayed for things which are actually busted, and not to move features from the ports collection to the base system. I think everyone agrees that having a cryptography toolkit in the base system would be great, but we don't have to have it for *this* release, and there are no "cool things" for *this* release which depend on some cryptography toolkit being part of the base system. --- Garance Alistair Drosehn = gad@eclipse.acs.rpi.edu Senior Systems Programmer or drosih@rpi.edu Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?v04210106b4d5331b3e73>