On Tue, 23 Jul 2024 at 16:32, Joe Orton wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 23, 2024 at 10:54:12AM +0200, Clemens Lang wrote: > > However, we should still consider the effect this will have on > > developers that build software on Fedora — they will also have to > > specify -DOPENSSL_NO_ENGINE now or see failing builds, and we don’t > > really see that impact until 41 releases. > > Yup, exactly. This is only a bad outcome and will be seen (correctly) by > upstream projects as Fedora shipping a broken OpenSSL when we start > wasting their time with people filing "I couldn't build on Fedora" bug > reports. Or those reports just come straight to us and we have to say "yes we know, but we're not going to fix it", like this: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2312672 > The time Fedora maintainers have spent on this is a sunk cost, doing > nothing is clearly inferior to all other options. At minimum we should > ship F41 with openssl-devel Requires: openssl-engine-devel again. > (Having OpenSSL <configuration.h> #define OPENSSL_NO_ENGINE properly is > by far my preferred option) It's fixed in rawhide now, but are we still against fixing it for F41? Affected Fedora packages might have been fixed, but people build other software on Fedora that isn't already packaged and built in koji. I'll add a workaround in boost-devel if the decision is still that openssl shouldn't fix it in F41. -- _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
