On Thu, Feb 07, 2013 at 08:34:18AM -0500, Dan Winship wrote:
> On 02/07/2013 07:27 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> > The other potential impact is that gnutls no longer uses libgcrypt,
> > but instead uses nettle.
> >
> > This can impact apps that were using gnutls in a threaded environment
> > be
On 02/07/2013 07:27 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> The other potential impact is that gnutls no longer uses libgcrypt,
> but instead uses nettle.
>
> This can impact apps that were using gnutls in a threaded environment
> because they probably have used 'gcry_control' to register a thread
> impl
On Wed, Feb 06, 2013 at 09:59:36PM +0100, Tomas Mraz wrote:
> I'm rebasing gnutls in rawhide to gnutls-3.1.7. This is much awaited
> upgrade by many. However note that potentially patented ECC sources are
> removed.
>
> The rebase bumps soname to libgnutls.so.28. The other potentially
> disrupting
On Wed, 2013-02-06 at 21:59 +0100, Tomas Mraz wrote:
> I'm rebasing gnutls in rawhide to gnutls-3.1.7. This is much awaited
> upgrade by many. However note that potentially patented ECC sources are
> removed.
Yay! at last! Thanks.
Although RFC6090 *really* ought to have solved the nonsense about
I'm rebasing gnutls in rawhide to gnutls-3.1.7. This is much awaited
upgrade by many. However note that potentially patented ECC sources are
removed.
The rebase bumps soname to libgnutls.so.28. The other potentially
disrupting change is removal of libgnutls-extra.so. The only packages
that depend
