16.09.2025 11:49, Rafael Sadowski пишет:
> On Sun Sep 07, 2025 at 02:31:47PM +0100, Stuart Henderson wrote:
>> On 2025/09/07 08:43, Rafael Sadowski wrote:
>>> On Fri Sep 05, 2025 at 07:05:59PM +0200, Theo Buehler wrote:
>>>>> "You cannot use eopenssl35" I don't understand that ;)
>>>>
>>>> Because the dependency tree is a horrific mess and has parts that
>>>> already pull in libcrypto and libssl from base. Mistakes in the
>>>> dependencies in Qt land happen all the time. How do you know that
>>>> you don't end up mixing libressl and openssl which will blow up sooner
>>>> or later?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Good point we can't mix libcrypto from base and eopenssl35,
>>> nevertheless it would be nice to import the 24 version.
>>
>> Some things just aren't going to be able to work on OpenBSD.
> 
> Yes, but the attached and suggested port version 25.04.3 works
> well with libressl

The tarball you sent looks OK and builds.

Although update-plist makes me wonder whether this is fine or an oversight:

	...
	Can't put into any plist (no applicable prefix):
		/firmware
		/rc.d
	Looking for unregistered conflicts


> and we can pin to this version until consumers
> use the openssl-only openssl/param_build.h stuff.

What does "pin" mean?

> 
> I tested the upcoming 25.08 and it doesn't need it yet.

If that's the case, your comment block in the Makefile about openssl35
looks incorrect and should go.

> 
> I would be delighted if someone could give me an OK to import it.
> 
> Rafael
> 
>>
>> Same with new versions of nextcloudclient, which depend on libp11,
>> which depends on engine support in openssl.
>>
>