Hi, Thanks for feedback!
On 31-10-17, Philip Prindeville wrote: > I’d also note that some of the compatibility stuff has been deprecated, > hasn’t it? What do you mean? > > define Package/openssl/Default/description > > -The OpenSSL Project is a collaborative effort to develop a robust, > > -commercial-grade, full-featured, and Open Source toolkit implementing the > > Secure > > -Sockets Layer (SSL v2/v3) and Transport Layer Security (TLS v1) protocols > > as well > > -as a full-strength general purpose cryptography library. > > +OpenSSL is a robust, commercial-grade, and full-featured toolkit for the > > +Transport Layer Security (TLS) and Secure Sockets Layer (SSL) protocols. > > +It is also a general-purpose cryptography library. > > > Don’t know where this text is coming from, but it’s important to also note > that OpenSSL provides a full suite of crypto and digest primitives (MD5, > SHA*, AES, RSA, 3DES, Blowfish, etc), as well as PKI support (X.509, etc), > which is useful for non-networking applications as well (file security, code > signing, etc). I took the text from https://www.openssl.org/ I changed the description because the old one was mentioning SSLv2, which is no longer supported. > Nice getting rid of all those patches! How many are we down to after this > round of changes? Basically just one, which defines custom compilation flags for the different architectures supported by OpenWrt. In this RFC I had added a second patch to fix build on aarch64, but it already made it upstream (in 1.1.0g, while this RFC is based 1.1.0f). By the way, did you have a look at dependent packages that fail to build? I remember there was at least wget. Baptiste
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Lede-dev mailing list Lede-dev@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/lede-dev
