On Mon, 25 Sep 2000, Henrique M Holschuh wrote:
>>On Tue, 19 Sep 2000, Adrian Bunk wrote:
>> On Mon, 18 Sep 2000, Russell Coker wrote:
>> > My package Postal is best compiled with libssl095a-dev installed so that
>> > it can support SSL. However it will detect the lack of such support at
>> > build time and be compiled without SSL if the header files aren't
>> > installed.
>> > The next version will have build-depends on libssl095a-dev, but I think
>> > that it would be more accurate to have build-suggests. So that if you
>> > can get the libssl095a-dev then you should do so, but my program will
>> > work quite well (with reduced functionality) if you don't.
>> You have to decide whether the program should be in main or in
>I humbly ask you not to remove the SSL support, and to keep the package in
>non-US/main. IMHO it makes no sense to allow the dumb US regulations to
>lower the capabilities of your package.
That is exactly my approach. However if someone wants to take a copy of my
source, cut out all the ssl stuff and upload a postal-nossl package to main
then I would be happy to see that happen. It probably wouldn't be too
difficult for a suitably motivated person to write a script that downloads
the non-us source, cuts out the SSL code and uploads the nossl version. But
I am not motivated to do it myself.