On Mon, Apr 12, 2004 at 01:13:50PM +0200, Dominique Devriese wrote: > Kevin Krammer writes: > > Debian has a clear advantage with such problems, the highly > > appreciated effort to create a fine package granularity enables > > packagers to build alternative packages (one for feature disabled > > and one for enabled), > > I suppose you're talking about the various "-ssl" packages ? As you > may have noticed, these are disappearing or have already disappeared > from Debian. In general, these were always workarounds, and Debian > never really liked to have them. AFAIK, the reason they were > necessary is so that not too much stuff should go into > non-free. > > Anyway, IMHO, there's no point in not having ssl support in kdelibs, > these days, just as there's no point in not having IDN support these > days, and upstream should just make both libs a hard dependency. Actually the problem with openssl is that it is, was, and always will be GPL incompatible. The only way to cleanly solve the linking issue is to use gnutls which is LGPL. The openssl issue is currently worked around due to how kde uses https, but if more things start linking to openssl it will be bad. It would be much better if KDE were converted to use gnutls at some time in the future. Chris
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature