Re: Should we settle on one SSL implementation?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Wed, 2007-10-24 at 12:14 -0400, Bernardo Innocenti wrote:
> On 10/23/07 10:34, Jesse Keating wrote:
> > On Tue, 23 Oct 2007 16:23:24 +0200
> > Tomas Mraz <tmraz@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > 
> >> Why remove? Just not use a built-in code but call NSS instead.
> > 
> > Call NSS, to make a sha1sum?
> 
> Please, let's not add an external dependency for something
> as trivial as a SHA1.

Just make it easy to compile with NSS or use your own if NSS is not
available.
I don't like the work I need to do to make this happen in my packages
either, but if you use a generic crypto lib it will make your life
easier in the long run (esp. if you make it possible to change algos
easily maybe even with just a configuration option)

> See this thread on xorg-devel@ .

The world is full of people reinventing the wheel :) why is that thread
relevant ?

Simo.


-- 
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora Testing]     [Fedora Formulas]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kernel Development]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Desktop]     [PAM]     [Red Hat Development]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]
  Powered by Linux