>Ted Unangst tedunangst.com> writes:
>
>> Any system that actually uses egd is so hopelessly broken you
>> are better off just turning around and walking away. No software in
>> 2014 should be using egd; no software in 2014 should support using egd
>> by accident.
>
>This is wrong. The egd protoco
Ted Unangst tedunangst.com> writes:
> Any system that actually uses egd is so hopelessly broken you
> are better off just turning around and walking away. No software in
> 2014 should be using egd; no software in 2014 should support using egd
> by accident.
This is wrong. The egd protocol is acc
> I didn't know what egd was up until today, but reading what it is I
> completely understand that consideration. However, this breaks a number
> of packages (wget, python, ruby).
>
> There's probably a simple solution: Just add dummy functions that
> always return -1 (which according to the docs
On Sat, Jul 12, 2014 at 01:13, Hanno Böck wrote:
> I didn't know what egd was up until today, but reading what it is I
> completely understand that consideration. However, this breaks a number
> of packages (wget, python, ruby).
Those packages would all be better off without egd support. In the
c
On 2014/07/12 01:13, Hanno Böck wrote:
> I didn't know what egd was up until today, but reading what it is I
> completely understand that consideration. However, this breaks a number
> of packages (wget, python, ruby).
> There's probably a simple solution: Just add dummy functions that
> always re
Hi,
I hope this is the right place to post libressl-related discussions.
I'm new here.
After today's release of the portable libressl version I tried to use
it as a drop-in-replacement on a gentoo linux system. There were a
numbre of issues popping up.
A number of packages failed to compile due
