Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 3 Mar 2012 08:31:41 -0500
From:      Jerry <>
To:        FreeBSD <>
Subject:   Re: openssl from ports
Message-ID:  <20120303083141.1975c60c@scorpio>
In-Reply-To: <>
References:  <> <20120302171631.775dd715@scorpio> <> <20120302182156.58c10d82@scorpio> <> <20120303071958.0c963330@scorpio> <>

Next in thread | Previous in thread | Raw E-Mail | Index | Archive | Help
On Sat, 03 Mar 2012 12:49:18 +0000
Matthew Seaman articulated:

> Unfortunately I can't answer that.  I'm not in any position to decide
> such things.
> However I can hazard a guess at some of the possible reasons:
>    * openssl API changes between 0.9.x and 1.0.0 mean updating the
>      shlibs is not a trivial operation, and it was judged that the
>      benefits obtained from updating did not justify the effort.
>    * no one had any time to import the new version.  There's plenty of
>      security-critical stuff depending on openssl, and making sure all
>      of that didn't suffer from any regressions is not a trivial job.
>    * simply that no one thought of doing the upgrade.

Thanks Matthew. Personally, I have my own take on the matter. Regarding
your first two possibility, I believe the problem can be directly
traced to "procrastination". At some point in time, there will come the
need to update the base system's OPENSSL version. Procrastination only
doubles the work you have to do tomorrow. It reminds me of what a
college professor once told me, "There is never enough time to do it
right, but there is always enough time to do it over." Sad but true.

As to your third possibility, the need to update the port has been
mentioned several times on this forum over the past year. I find it
extremely improbable that no one considered the possibility that the
existing application might not be up-to-date. Yet, as has been stated
numerous times, if you always expect the worst in people you will
never be disappointed.

Jerry ♔

Disclaimer: off-list followups get on-list replies or get ignored.
Please do not ignore the Reply-To header.

Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <>