Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 27 Mar 2018 09:46:54 +0000
From:      bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org
To:        python@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   [Bug 226883] lang/python27, lang/python35, lang/python36: libressl 2.7 build failures
Message-ID:  <bug-226883-21822-71Qdi6Kly6@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-226883-21822@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
References:  <bug-226883-21822@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D226883

Kubilay Kocak <koobs@FreeBSD.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |brnrd@freebsd.org,
                   |                            |python@FreeBSD.org
             Status|New                         |Open

--- Comment #2 from Kubilay Kocak <koobs@FreeBSD.org> ---
Thank you for your report Charlie,

Could you confirm/clarify some points that might be slightly ambiguous:

- Is D14837 the same as the OpenBSD patches, or different, fixing "both
ssl=3Dopenssl and ssl=3Dopenssl-devel" build failures referenced in comment=
 0?

- In D14837, Does "Fails otherwise" mean the same as "breaks both ssl=3Dope=
nssl
and ssl=3Dopenssl-devel" as referenced in comment 0 here, or some other
subset/combination?

- I interpreted 'upstream' in 'upstream will not release their patch' to me=
an
Python (waiting for libressl upstream to 'release' before committing code).=
 Is
this correct?

An explicit/accurate/complete list of what succeeds/fails would be super ha=
ndy
to figure out where/what needs work from here:

>From the standpoint of Python (team) and python ports, we'd ideally like to
take changesets from upstream after they're committed and backported there.
We're happy to carry local patches prior to next point releases in each bra=
nch.

If we can confidently get to the point where we have a candidate changeset =
with
thorough QA passing and no regressions, we can consider landing it early
(before upstream (Python)).

For clarity purposes, if the changeset in D14837 is incomplete (in that it
regresses certain ssl combinations), then it should be abandoned in favour =
of a
'work in progress' patch here for someone (Bernard, CC'd, is the point on
libressl things) to review and improve upon.

At the point where a QA passing/complete patch is ready, we can put it back=
 up
on Phabricator for broader review, if necessary beyond here.

--=20
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.=



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?bug-226883-21822-71Qdi6Kly6>