From: David R. M. <dr...@ma...> - 2004-06-28 15:15:59
|
The -ssl variants are something of a problem at the moment. I agree that it would be extremely sensible to have the -ssl treated the same as other variants. But at present, we isolate cryptographic-enabled packages from the others by putting them in their own tree, so that folks who are respecting the cryptographic export restrictions can easily disable the cryptographic stuff. Until we have a way of "turning off" the -ssl packages without physically locating their .info files in a separate tree, we are stuck with the current system. -- Dave <dm...@us...> wrote: > Christian Schaffner wrote: > > | Update of /cvsroot/fink/dists/10.3/unstable/crypto/finkinfo > | In directory sc8-pr-cvs1.sourceforge.net:/tmp/cvs-serv1343/crypto/finkinfo > | > | Added Files: > | socat-ssl.info > I think we should no longer do that. > I feel it is better to have an ssl variant rather than a -ssl.info file. > Maybe I am overlooking something here (since crypto has its own section) > but personally I feel we should not accept any _new_ -whatever variants > that do not use the variants system we have. > > Please do correct me if I am getting something totally wring here > > - -d > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (Darwin) > Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org > > iD8DBQFA4DEpPMoaMn4kKR4RA9+4AKCeqgYVaCDhuedxpA8mTLNZYGLynQCgiJDJ > YJ2jCwYPmLRJhi3mvoX3KIE= > =x6ZT > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.Net email sponsored by Black Hat Briefings & Training. > Attend Black Hat Briefings & Training, Las Vegas July 24-29 - > digital self defense, top technical experts, no vendor pitches, > unmatched networking opportunities. Visit www.blackhat.com > _______________________________________________ > Fink-devel mailing list > Fin...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel > |