From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-ua1-f65.google.com (mail-ua1-f65.google.com [209.85.222.65]) by mail.openembedded.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EDDDE74621 for ; Wed, 5 Sep 2018 15:45:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-ua1-f65.google.com with SMTP id 101-v6so6177390uav.7 for ; Wed, 05 Sep 2018 08:45:13 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=OWDZKgKbTXJi6GCNxwaY+50OLrOqLvWcf3L0gXc56Gw=; b=El0OO7HwndW32Y4epPlIh3FiXYwPqmh38dxHMeLCJPpPyruee/UL/J8tVzyygAzYFW EvI3GOxbFtIZ9LfMAZzsQjE7x74qw9sw4cnqE48jhayUHwue2Zny1sbhYbqF0DAAvRyF mi4bpS3Ui6quL2C3/TKivWLh5E2kDFcMCBRilBcAO0arCmPZB02GcgbHCPMg6PZmIyTY KLNLW7QWFRTsX+b7hPvjfUSUZ2ENDunh67PcxeJcbpCR6SOiR8w9i/YTTtFGIOQi07dT wwohFTVpXYKIQdlQMfc4jFrz1hjv2JRQB1CKhbOI4kHHO2EyZ9nQZ1cSpR59gzidY2Fc EEqA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=OWDZKgKbTXJi6GCNxwaY+50OLrOqLvWcf3L0gXc56Gw=; b=GZQdqh2RqA4Jsyql39MnZTjHRtPZWXj5+Gu2aypviHP1WBJiOmhTqKcwUExXLogvyY GbADpITVD69AU8yeA+j5XxUzGztg4iYNLLOqK2SKAYGeF7Y8qG97XeUbVz7ZVRuS3nlh rQYLEUTqH2LxhtBC1tVJZIy3JvagG2FVCm3U6RCtXlDgpgDXmbbk9TnWqidCv/5aWg35 gSrodtSZphEnn0IVQBdCXFVS7I4y9O+zbhTu3QtvmjhVa/YeX6ebvXx9k/RiCeaZUErH S3NGZcLhmIXuoPDha4TBg89MbnIk/HnyYCtmEIyu/4lYK62JGZU8LQ93l41qn6pJKOMn 5jGQ== X-Gm-Message-State: APzg51Bn4Yj5xVZk5bGBBLhsNqn2SvR5pNWy5TurAvB8SK8Ci2zI81zH UxAnRztYIDTe3Qc1eR2e0wp4pWl53iASRnP3Kqg= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ANB0VdYaEIA6tlH8UXCW3FRc+M9cqrkuz38Fwx3qDT0fMxSNyoJRnAh4iTdTFa4UasYDmUXe27fE5RZANEFsvmLqhjs= X-Received: by 2002:a67:e2d8:: with SMTP id i24-v6mr13127278vsm.115.1536162312638; Wed, 05 Sep 2018 08:45:12 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 2002:ab0:2904:0:0:0:0:0 with HTTP; Wed, 5 Sep 2018 08:45:11 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <20180905085322.GA1795@jama> From: Andre McCurdy Date: Wed, 5 Sep 2018 08:45:11 -0700 Message-ID: To: Khem Raj Cc: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/6] openssl: rename openssl 1.0.x to openssl10 and make openssl 1.1.x the default version X-BeenThere: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 05 Sep 2018 15:45:12 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 8:15 AM, Khem Raj wrote: > On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 7:45 AM Richard Purdie > wrote: >> >> On Wed, 2018-09-05 at 10:53 +0200, Martin Jansa wrote: >> > But patching the components to use libssl10 might actually work >> > (unlike >> > just changing DEPENDS to openssl10). >> > >> > It's not only conflicting in build-time in RSS, but it will conflict >> > on target as well. You either need to migrate all components included >> > in image to 1.1 or all stay on 1.0. >> >> That isn't quite the case. For OE-Core we have images using both 1.0 >> (openssh) and 1.1 installed together. Its true there are some issues if >> you try and parallel install both the -dev packages but normal target >> images are working. >> >> We could probably "fix" the -dev images to an extent by making 1.1 >> replace 1.0 dev pieces. >> >> The build time sysroot problem is harder unfortunately, I've ideas >> about things we might be able to do but haven't experimented as yet. >> > > If runtime conflicts are clear I don't think the runtime issues are clear. Being able to install both versions of openssl on the target and have them be used by different applications is one case (already solved by different sonames). But the builds that are failing in meta-oe are a different case - a single application is indirectly linked against both versions of openssl. Loading two versions of openssl into the same address space at runtime hasn't been solved... and may not be realistically solvable - e.g. what happens if code in an app compiled against openssl 1.1 tries to share an openssl data type with code in a library compiled against openssl 1.0? > I think we can install the headers into /usr/include/openssl10/ > and dev libs into /usr/lib/openssl10 > and provide a openssl10.pc file to we can use pkgconfig in packages