Re: Linking coreutils against OpenSSL
* Theodore Ts'o:
> If you can get upstream a patch so that coreutils could try to dlopen
> OpenSSL and use it if it is available, but skip it if it is not, that
> might be one way to avoid OpenSSL going into essential. The challenge
> is that OpenSSL is not known for its ability to maintain a stable ABI,
> but if we only care about supporting a specific version of OpenSSL
> (the one which is shipped with coreutils) and given that the fallback
> is a slower sha256sum, which IMHO is *not* a disaster, perhaps it's
> doable?
I think the OpenSSL 3 ABI should be stable for quite some time. It's
probably not even necessary to use dlvsym instead of dlsym because I
think OpenSSL upstream just adds new functions if they need new
behaviors.
Reply to: