From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=) Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/1] OpenSSL 1.1.0 Date: Fri, 02 Sep 2016 14:43:58 +0200 Message-ID: <87y43albe9.fsf@gnu.org> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:52371) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bfnpG-0000LY-Jr for guix-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 02 Sep 2016 08:44:07 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bfnpC-0006z4-Db for guix-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 02 Sep 2016 08:44:05 -0400 In-Reply-To: (Ricardo Wurmus's message of "Fri, 2 Sep 2016 09:40:27 +0200") List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-devel" To: Ricardo Wurmus Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org Ricardo Wurmus skribis: > Leo Famulari writes: > >> This patch updates to OpenSSL to 1.1.0. >> >> I don't think we should update now; basically nothing works yet with the >> new interface. >> >> But, I could adapt the patch to add this version as openssl-next. >> >> Your thoughts? > > I also read about lots of breakage due to the update so I think it=E2=80= =99s > okay to add it as =E2=80=9Copenssl-next=E2=80=9D for now. Agreed (though its fine to use =E2=80=9Copenssl=E2=80=9D in the =E2=80=98na= me=E2=80=99 field IMO.) Ludo=E2=80=99.