On 9/20/15 8:59 AM, Alexis Ballier wrote:
On Sun, 20 Sep 2015 07:49:24 -0400
Rich Freeman <ri...@gentoo.org> wrote:
On Sun, Sep 20, 2015 at 5:50 AM, Alexis Ballier <aball...@gentoo.org>
wrote:
Yes, that's what gnome team is doing with gtk2 vs gtk3; however, I'm
not sure how much work it is. Only package I know of providing
different slots depending on what it's built upon is webkit-gtk.
I can't imagine every library using {open,libre}ssl provide two
slots, two different libraries, two different pkg-config and the
like files, etc. And every package using a library that uses a
library that uses a library that uses {open,libre}ssl to have to
chose what ssl library to use.
I don't think the suggestion is to make it so that any package can be
built against either, though individual maintainers can support this.
I think the suggestion is to make it so that the libraries themselves
can be installed side-by-side, so that packages can depend exclusively
on one or the other and not effectively block each other.
I don't think so, and I explained why it doesn't work: Loading both of
them in the same process screws things up.
See:
https://blog.flameeyes.eu/2008/06/a-few-risks-i-see-related-to-the-new-portage-2-2-preserve-libs-behaviour#gsc.tab=0
and replace changing major number by changing library name, it's the
exact same deal, or worse since it is now "permanent".
+1
You really don't want to be mixing both on a system. I've been working
on libressl from the sidelines (making sure it works with embedded
systems) and it doesn't share abi compat with openssl. I guess we could
hack away at it so that it installs side by side with openssl, but
you're just asking for trouble unless you're really careful to keep the
two separate when dynamically linking.
--
Anthony G. Basile, Ph.D.
Gentoo Linux Developer [Hardened]
E-Mail : bluen...@gentoo.org
GnuPG FP : 1FED FAD9 D82C 52A5 3BAB DC79 9384 FA6E F52D 4BBA
GnuPG ID : F52D4BBA
