On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 07:10:51PM +0000, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Adrian Bunk writes ("Re: Proposed (lib)curl switch to openssl 1.1"):
> > What I suggest above would be a transition that should be coordinated
> > with the release team like other transitions.
>
> I'm not 100% opposed to doing this as a normal library transition with
> a soname change. I don't feel I understand the tradeoffs well.Well, one downside is that doing a full blown transition is likely to take more work and time to see it completed. Unfortunately I don't have the time required and can't commit to doing this myself. I do agree it's the correct solution though, and it would be a good opportunity to finally sync SONAME with upstream (last time a transition of libcurl was attempted some 10 years or so ago, it was halted for reasons now lost in the mists of time, so we have been stuck carrying some hacks to pretend we are still using the old SONAME, see e.g. [0] [1]). Cheers [0] https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/collab-maint/curl.git/tree/debian/patches/03_keep_symbols_compat.patch [1] https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/collab-maint/curl.git/tree/debian/libcurl3.links
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
