2007/609 Alpine: Mail User Agent

[Bart Smaalders]

Darren J Moffat wrote:
> It is what PSARC wanted when the original case to include OpenSSL was 
> reviewed.  The contact is very explicit about which OpenSSL APIs we 
> believe the OpenSSL community has some commitment to (the SSL and EVP 
> APIs in particular).
> 
> Personally I don't mind either way, however without one there is no 
> comeback to the OpenSSL team if they introduce an updated version of 
> OpenSSL and the build of another project in another consolidation starts 
> failing.  That is not to say they won't help debug the issue though.
> 
> 

Why not place the portions of the API that you deem more stable into
a version in the library mapfile, and place the rest (unstable) in
another version?  Any application linking w/ OpenSSL can instantly
determine its ACTUAL usage of the APIs, and thus those apps using the
portion of the OpenSSL APIs considered stable can avoid the paperwork. 
This also makes the OpenSSL team's job easier when it comes time to 
change OpenSSL versions....

- Bart


-- 
Bart Smaalders			Solaris Kernel Performance
barts at cyber.eng.sun.com		http://blogs.sun.com/barts