On Mon, 2007-09-17 at 12:19 +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > Leo wrote: > > On 2007-09-16 13:37 +0100, Alex Lancaster wrote: > >> Hmm, I notice that gnutls is used as a shared library in many > >> applications that it might be non-trivial to update if the .so version > >> is bumped because it will require a lot of rebuilds. > > > > That's why it is difficult for users to upgrade this package. I try to > > remove Gnutls and that will remove 299 packages that depend on it as > > well. > > Does anyone know if this new GnuTLS is API and/or ABI compatible? I > know that they broke a load of API functions between 1.0 and 1.4, which > required a source patches and retesting for libvirt. Are there any plans to feature GnuTLS in the crypto consolidation. I like (sort of...) the crypto consolidation idea, but for example Samba4 uses GnuTLS, as it's callback functions fits our IO modal well. This might also avoid issues with trying to keep one more crypto package up to date. Andrew Bartlett -- Andrew Bartlett http://samba.org/~abartlet/ Authentication Developer, Samba Team http://samba.org Samba Developer, Red Hat Inc.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
