On Sat, 30 Sep 2017 12:23:09 +0000 ng0 wrote: > Christopher Baines transcribed 2.1K bytes: > > On Mon, 21 Aug 2017 09:57:26 +0000 > > ng0 wrote: > > > > > The dependency chain of GNUnet demands GnuTLS with DANE support. > > > You can use it without DANE, but there are certain parts which > > > will not work. DANE is recommended. (ports of FREEBSD uses > > > gnutls-dane for libmicrohttpd aswell for example). > > > > > From c9dedfd1a6f91d557006b00505a428be84102b1e Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 > > > 2001 From: ng0 > > > Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2017 09:28:51 +0000 > > > Subject: [PATCH 1/4] gnu: gnutls: Add 'gnutls-dane'. > > > > > > * gnu/packages/tls.scm (gnutls/dane): New variable. > > > > Hey, so I'm trying to do some reviewing. > > > > What was your reasoning for creating a new gnutls/dane package, > > rather than adding unbound to the existing gnutls package? > > > > I don't know much about GnuTLS, but it would be good to make it > > clear why this approach was taken, especially in the commit message > > and by the gnutls/dane package definition. > > Honestly, I did not want to touch the gnutls package for this. > I wanted to leave the option open to have gnutls without dane. > Sure, it's a useful feature. If you think I should apply it > directly to gnutls, tell me and I'll send a new patch. I'm happy with that reason, if you could put that in the relevant commit message, or in a comment by the gnutls/dane package definition (or both), I'll check I can build all the changed packages, and push if they all build for me.