On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 9:56 PM, Jorge Arellano Cid<jcid@dillo.org> wrote:
Hi,
?Working on
? ?2.- To enable-ssl or not enable-ssl (define what to do).
On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 10:36:39AM +0200, Michal Nowak wrote:
[...] Generally speaking for Fedora, we won't turn on options which are not turned on by default in upstream - it usually brings divergence from upstream and comments in upstream mailing lists (not this one :) ) like: "That poor distroX turned on --enable-coolness so we are not supporting users of this distro at all."
Turning on SSL in upstream means more pressure for fixing it, usually :). But I am reading dillo-dev long enough to know it's not that easy.
[snip]
?Obviously the safe option is not to offer ssl-enabled packages, but that will mainly have the effect of no https-dpi at all.
?I'm not quite sure which one would be best. ?Comments?
http://mnowak.fedorapeople.org/dillo2/static/ Looks like Kelson's having some problems with building, so I patched-rebuilt-installed Kelson's static FLTK2 SRPM and rebuilt Dillo2. Now there are present i586 pkgs for F-11, both SSL on/off, tomorrow I can build x86-64 pkgs for F-11 at work. And i386 packs for F-10 (hopefully there's still the F-10 beast in KVM). (But treat them as third party ones, don't trust them :). )
-- ?Cheers ?Jorge.-
_______________________________________________ Dillo-dev mailing list Dillo-dev@dillo.org http://lists.auriga.wearlab.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dillo-dev