From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Nala Ginrut Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.devel Subject: Re: About Guile crypto support Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2013 17:51:39 +0800 Organization: HFG Message-ID: <1360576299.5068.20.camel@Renee-desktop.suse> References: <1359896146.2754.19.camel@Renee-desktop.suse> <871ucvof60.fsf@gnu.org> <1360032192.2754.61.camel@Renee-desktop.suse> <87mwvisqwj.fsf@gnu.org> <878v6yojxg.fsf@gnu.org> <87sj55bjxz.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1360576316 20985 80.91.229.3 (11 Feb 2013 09:51:56 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2013 09:51:56 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Andy Wingo , guile-devel@gnu.org To: Ludovic =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Court=E8s?= Original-X-From: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Feb 11 10:52:17 2013 Return-path: Envelope-to: guile-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1U4q3c-0005Sp-LH for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 11 Feb 2013 10:52:16 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:42289 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1U4q3J-0000AJ-9D for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 11 Feb 2013 04:51:57 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:54308) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1U4q3E-00009d-OI for guile-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 11 Feb 2013 04:51:54 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1U4q3D-00026R-4n for guile-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 11 Feb 2013 04:51:52 -0500 Original-Received: from mail-pa0-f42.google.com ([209.85.220.42]:56163) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1U4q3B-000267-8U; Mon, 11 Feb 2013 04:51:49 -0500 Original-Received: by mail-pa0-f42.google.com with SMTP id kq12so3026172pab.1 for ; Mon, 11 Feb 2013 01:51:48 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=x-received:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:date:in-reply-to :references:organization:content-type:x-mailer:mime-version :content-transfer-encoding; bh=JdVgPDRmDcbt48umrZ0FgJYV2moJkXSab3ZtYo5TONQ=; b=MatRCgNfQp51BFaUWPNbH6GBgg7UEzK1klU+Ive4pIcjxjcuBus2LYhUpRPJwuI2dX zWm0tQJsseJrPzHYIpaU7qkfO3NYNZHN063hIOPBTtNLHAPDV3klhL+Gj51pvFhUe2Qh ZPhwBg7Ea7NNZtxD2Lyy3fh3JJVaCCVZsbHy4z0yLAN1r55bfzTTDuLIM42pc3P6KGtl ynHpXsMEEs0WgfqTKRh6MbRCexpC0jOd0GTYdGQUIqJ9prB3ElqYudhzSYykxCmZXLcW Ek6/Zxsk8GloABJvC90D8rX3doAop7ywV2Kjurc11oo10dqr8yPLUj+DowkbQeQJBGZB gUXw== X-Received: by 10.66.80.162 with SMTP id s2mr39800708pax.61.1360576308013; Mon, 11 Feb 2013 01:51:48 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: from [192.168.1.106] ([112.114.169.239]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id bi8sm66419152pab.15.2013.02.11.01.51.42 (version=SSLv3 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Mon, 11 Feb 2013 01:51:46 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <87sj55bjxz.fsf@gnu.org> X-Mailer: Evolution 3.4.4 X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 3.x [fuzzy] X-Received-From: 209.85.220.42 X-BeenThere: guile-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Developers list for Guile, the GNU extensibility library" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.devel:15724 Archived-At: On Sat, 2013-02-09 at 16:12 +0100, Ludovic Courtès wrote: > Hi, > > Daniel Hartwig skribis: > > > By the way, I very much like the conventions used in the GnuTLS > > bindings. The enums in particular make a lot of sense for a security > > library, with the extreme type safety they provide. I will pursue a > > similar approach. > > Yeah, I think it’s helpful. > > > One question. With the current state of FFI, do you think it matters > > much whether the bulk of the bindings are done in C or FFI? > > I think it depends on the amount of public C structs, enums, inlines, > and constants, and how often they are changed. When there are too many > of them and they are subject to change, it might be easier to use C > (though that can be worked around from the FFI by calling the C > compiler, as in [0].) > > My impression is that libgcrypt uses mostly opaque pointer types and has > a stable API, so the using FFI should be just fine. > > An issue with the FFI is distros where .la and .so files are only > available in the -dev package, because then ‘dynamic-link’ won’t work > unless that -dev package is installed (as recently discussed on > guile-user.)unanimous > This could be a real issue since almost all mainstream distros packaging policy force *.so be put in -devel packages. Though openSUSE/debian adds the exception for Guile, I believe it's so hard to do that for every packages uses Guile. Considering Guile would exists in every GNU project (in principle), the issue may break the packaging policy totally. @andy: But I do like to have our own dynamic-link without libltdl, which will be interesting and a study chance for me . ;-) And maybe it'll be blamed for reinventing wheels? > Thanks, > Ludo’. > > [0] http://git.sv.gnu.org/cgit/libchop.git/tree/guile2/chop/internal.scm#n130 >