Sprinkling WITH_OPENSSL_BASE in ports, ratbox build failure.

Matthew Seaman m.seaman at infracaninophile.co.uk
Wed Jan 28 07:43:15 UTC 2015


On 2015/01/28 05:57, Dewayne Geraghty wrote:
> ratbox generated an unusual error message today, via portmaster on a
> 10.1Stable, amd64 system

> However commenting out the recently inserted
> WITH_OPENSSL_BASE=yes
> from the Makefile enables the build to complete and uses the correct
> crypto and ssl libraries.  Shouldn't it be an option base or port?  Or
> is the openssl port going to go away?

More like the other way around: ports will use the openssl version from
ports exclusively, and the version in the base system will move into a
private location.  (This is my understanding of current thinking, but I
make no guarantee that it is what does eventually get implemented.)

The ircd-ratbox port doesn't appear to be doing anything unusual with
respect to openssl support that I can see from a quick inspection of the
port Makefile.

If you've just added 'WITH_OPENSSL_BASE' to your make.conf, then (a) you
potentially need to recompile many ports which depend on openssl so you
don't end up with mixed linkage against both ports and base, and (b)
some ports require the ports version of openssl because they depend on
functionality only in the newer version available from ports.

Personally, I prefer 'WITH_OPENSSL_PORT=yes'  It's meant I have been
able to turn off SSLv2 and SSLv3 everywhere pretty simply (no more
POODLE...)

	Cheers,

	Matthew


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 882 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports/attachments/20150128/47f3193a/attachment.sig>


More information about the freebsd-ports mailing list