From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=)
Subject: Re: 01/02: gnu: libressl: Update to 2.5.3.
Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2017 22:12:00 +0200
Message-ID: <87fuh4nomn.fsf@gnu.org>
References: <20170412011114.29557.46901@vcs0.savannah.gnu.org>
	<20170412011115.CE2FF220BE@vcs0.savannah.gnu.org>
	<87pogioukr.fsf@netris.org> <20170412152029.GA5920@jasmine>
	<87mvbkny4y.fsf@gnu.org> <20170413185921.GD14931@jasmine>
	<8760i6q2vx.fsf@netris.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Return-path: <guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:60523)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <ludo@gnu.org>) id 1d0vxP-0000BW-PJ
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 19 Apr 2017 16:12:08 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <ludo@gnu.org>) id 1d0vxL-0005m3-K2
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 19 Apr 2017 16:12:07 -0400
In-Reply-To: <8760i6q2vx.fsf@netris.org> (Mark H. Weaver's message of "Fri, 14
	Apr 2017 14:07:30 -0400")
List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution."
	<guix-devel.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/guix-devel>,
	<mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/>
List-Post: <mailto:guix-devel@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guix-devel>,
	<mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Sender: "Guix-devel" <guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
To: Mark H Weaver <mhw@netris.org>
Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org

Mark H Weaver <mhw@netris.org> skribis:

> Leo Famulari <leo@famulari.name> writes:
>
>> On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 05:08:29PM +0200, Ludovic Court=C3=A8s wrote:
>>> A simple approach is to force LibreSSL to always use its non-getentropy
>>> code, and lift this restriction once we clearly require newer kernels=
=C2=B9.
>>> The attached patch does that.
>>>=20
>>> Thoughts?
>>
>>> +     ;; Do as if 'getentropy' was missing since older Linux kernels la=
ck it
>>> +     ;; and libc would return ENOSYS, which is not properly handled.
>>> +     '(#:configure-flags '("ac_cv_func_getentropy=3Dno")))
>
> Ludo's approach looks good to me.

Thanks for checking.  Committed.

>> Personally, I don't think it's paramount to offer substitutes for the
>> packages in question. But I know this is an unpopular position, in
>> general :)
>
> It's not just about not providing substitutes.  At present, our libressl
> simply won't work properly on systems with older kernels, including
> hydra.gnu.org and our x86 build slaves.
>
> One issue is that there's a longstanding hope for us to switch to using
> libressl for most or all packages that currently use openssl.  We would
> be blocked from doing that if we accept that our libressl won't work on
> older kernels.

Yeah, I think we have to be consistent about what our kernel requirement
is.  With libc unconditionally providing syscall wrappers like this one,
it=E2=80=99s easy to let incompatibilities slip through.

Ludo=E2=80=99.