On 2014-05-13 Yves-Alexis Perez <cor...@debian.org> wrote: > On dim., 2014-05-11 at 18:45 +0200, David Suárez wrote: > > Source: strongswan [...] > Hi GnuTLS maintainers. It seems that strongSwan (wrongly) missed a > build-dep on libgcrypt*-dev, and started to FTBFS just recently.
> I'm unsure why it happened just know, I guess some -dev package was > depending on the libgcrypt11-dev package. > Now, an easy fix would be to add either libgcrypt*-dev package to > build-deps, but now I'm a bit unsure which version to add. > Would it be possible to summarize the reasons we have both in the > archive and if there's a reason not the use the most recent one? Hello, libgcrypt11 and libgcrypt20 are mostly but not completely API compatible, some deprecated APIs have been removed. Gnutls26 therefore only works with the old version and up until recently we could not start transitioning to gnutls28 because the license of gmp was too restrictive for some important gnutls rdeps. That is changed now and is my strong wish to not have gnutls26 in jessie. It would also be nice to do without libgcrypt11. Given this I would recommend one of the following choices for gcrypt users: - If you are also using gnutls26, please upgrade to gnutls28. And if possible move from directly using gcrypt to using the gnutls crypto API to avoid dependencies on two crypto libraries (gcrypt, and the backend used by gnutls). Otherwise move to libgcrypt20 - If you are not using gnutls26, use libgcrypt20. Please note that libgcrypt20 currently does not have that many users in Debian yet, so it is not as well tested as the older version. hth, cu Andreas -- `What a good friend you are to him, Dr. Maturin. His other friends are so grateful to you.' `I sew his ears on from time to time, sure' -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-rc-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
