Emerge -pv openssl:
[ebuild R ] dev-libs/openssl-1.0.2l::gentoo USE="asm sslv3
tls-heartbeat zlib -bindist -gmp -kerberos -rfc3779 -sctp -sslv2
-static-libs {-test} -vanilla"...
I figured ssl better off without it; I think the issue with this package is
it builds it's own version of chromium as part of the emerge, and I think
this is where the ssl dependency comes in. Right though, I think package
maintainer is where I need to head to next.
Thanks
On Sat, Sep 2, 2017 at 11:40 AM, Adam Carter <adamcart...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 2, 2017 at 6:26 AM, Damo Brisbane <dhatche...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> I am having troubles installing dev-util/electron, related to linking in
>> "ssl3" in the final step of the ebuild, from build log:
>>
>> /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/6.3.0/../../../../x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/bin/ld:
>> cannot find -lssl3
>>
>>
>> FYI on ssl, I only want a "working/current" ssl and/or tls installation
>> and I don't care for the details around the installation other than I would
>> like - as much as possible - "ssl" to be future proof and compatible with
>> current and new installs; in this case I just want electron, and I can't
>> install the package because of this linking error. I can successfully build
>> by hacking the final link step and simply remove the reference to "-lssl",
>> below:
>>
>>
>> > cd $PORTAGE_TMPDIR/dev-util/electron-1.3.13-r1/work/chromium-
>> 52.0.2743.82/out/R
>> > x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-g++ -Wl,-O1 -Wl,--a
>> > ....obj/atom/app/electron.atom_main.o obj/libelectron_lib.a
>> o... lib/libnode.so lib/libv8.so -lz -lhttp_parser -lssl -lcrypto -
>>
>>
>> and compiles fine.
>>
>> There are no "ssl" use flags on electron?:
>>
>
> My first guess would be that your openssl is not compiled with sslv3. The
> ebuild for electron only asks for >=dev-libs/openssl-1.0.2g:0=[-bindist]
> not openssl[sslv3]. If that's the problem then there's a bug in electrons
> ebuild.
>
> What does emerge -pv openssl show for use flags?
>
> However, ssl is pretty much deprecated these days due to security issues,
> so unless you have a need to support something that cant do TLS, you're
> better off leaving it out. Another issue may be that -lssl may be a loose
> term for SSL+TLS...
>
