Date: Wed, 05 May 2021 21:02:03 -0700 From: Chris <portmaster@bsdforge.com> To: Dima Panov <fluffy@freebsd.org> Cc: Yasuhiro Kimura <yasu@utahime.org>, freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Making a port to use OpenSSL of ports collection on FreeBSD 11.x Message-ID: <0edc022ebd49e63759293f909a4875d2@bsdforge.com> In-Reply-To: <a4da2161-1d84-4dae-8be3-ae99305b6150@Canary> References: <8151EFB0-635D-4648-AF0B-653E45584F1A@grem.de> <20210505.232208.1752175478734160028.yasu@utahime.org> <eb646c67dea5797baa51c22b54e50568@bsdforge.com> <20210506.011037.2056308540818173996.yasu@utahime.org> <154fe2a4cccad0fb69ef5215fe265456@bsdforge.com> <a4da2161-1d84-4dae-8be3-ae99305b6150@Canary>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 2021-05-05 20:49, Dima Panov wrote: > Moin! > > Chris, your suggestion leads to dll hell due to mix-links between ssl > libraries :( > At least, your setup easily face up situation where one lib will be built > with > “port openss” and consumers still get a “base openssl”. DEFAULT_VERSION here > is > set to avoid a such situation — the whole ports collection should be linked > with > ONE ssl/crypto library. I agree. After posting my proposed solution. I was finally able to find _which_ of the ports I did it in. Fortunately, it was an isolated case. Which got me to thinking that _this_ case here had far reaching ramifications. I would have withdrawn my suggestion. But you beat me to it. ;-) Thanks for the reply (and correction), Dima! --Chris > > -- > Dima. (desktop, kde, x11, office, ports-secteam)@FreeBSD team > (fluffy@FreeBSD.org, https://t.me/dima_panov) > >> On Thursday, May 06, 2021 at 6:26 AM, Chris <portmaster@bsdforge.com >> (mailto:portmaster@bsdforge.com)> wrote: >> On 2021-05-05 09:10, Yasuhiro Kimura wrote: >> > From: Chris <portmaster@bsdforge.com> >> > Subject: Re: Making a port to use OpenSSL of ports collection on FreeBSD >> > 11.x >> > Date: Wed, 05 May 2021 08:03:00 -0700 >> > >> > > I ran into a similar situation requiring freebsd 11 users not use >> > > SSL from base, and I simply used a conditional based against freebsd >> > > version, that also included a RUN_DEPENDS on security/openssl >> > > Wouldn't that work in your case? >> > > >> > > --Chris >> > >> > Probably only adding security/openssl to *_DEPENDS isn't enough. If >> > you look at Mk/Uses/ssl.mk, you'll find the path of include files and >> > libraries are customized depending on which ssl stack is used. So you >> > also need to add similar custimizetion in Makefile of port avoding >> > conflicts with the settings in Mk/Uses/ssl.mk. And it must be hard >> > job. >> Well unless something has changed significantly in that regard over >> the last couple mos. I found it was enough to trap ${OSREL:R} targeting >> 11 && within that conditional add ssl=openssl >> It worked a treat. You may find some additional clues in >> bsd.default-versions.mk >> >> HTH >> >> --Chris >> > >> > --- >> > Yasuhiro Kimura >> > _______________________________________________ >> > freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list >> > https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports >> > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" >> _______________________________________________ >> freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list >> https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports >> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?0edc022ebd49e63759293f909a4875d2>