[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: [Pkg-openssl-devel] Bug#926315: openssl: wget https://google.com fails in d-i



Hi,

Thanks for looping me in, extending to debian-boot@.

Kurt Roeckx <kurt@roeckx.be> (2019-04-03):
> On Wed, Apr 03, 2019 at 10:03:13PM +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> > On 2019-04-03 11:14:54 [+0100], Dimitri John Ledkov wrote:
> > > $ wget https://google.com
> > > 
> > > fails in Buster alpha installer, when used from a booted netinst iso
> > > in a tty. It also means that fetch-url fails, and thus one cannot use
> > > https preseeding.
> > > 
> > > A fix/workaround, is $ touch /usr/lib/ssl/openssl.cnf it appears that
> > > openssl requires for that file to be present, and it cannot be a
> > > dangling symlink. However, in udeb environment such file does not
> > > exists. I guess that maybe libssl1.1-udeb should ship an empty
> > > openssl.cnf there, or ship the regular deb's /etc/ssl/openssl.cnf in
> > > /usr/lib/ssl/openssl.cnf in the udeb.
> > 
> > interresting.
> > Kurt: should we provide the openssl.cnf and move it from openssl to
> > libssl1.1 as well or should we rather treat the missing openssl.cnf as
> > okay?
> 
> I think shipping it in the libssl1.1 .deb is going to complicate
> upgrades, so I rather not do that. I don't see a problem doing it
> in the .udeb.
> 
> I'm not sure why not having the config file causes problems. I
> think it should be possible to run without config file, so I would
> at least like to know first why it fails.

I'm pretty sure we had successes with wget/https within d-i not so long
ago (i.e. during the last BSP at Mozilla's, past week), and there were
no changes on the openssl side in the meanwhile.

I'll be double checking using the month worth of dailies we have, and
report back with my findings.


Cheers,
-- 
Cyril Brulebois (kibi@debian.org)            <https://debamax.com/>
D-I release manager -- Release team member -- Freelance Consultant

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: