On 02/08/2017 06:05 PM, Kenneth Porter wrote: > --On Tuesday, February 07, 2017 2:33 PM -0800 Alice Wonder > <alice at domblogger.net> wrote: > >> What I mean is this - my LibreSSL package installs in /usr and not in >> /opt and that is intentional, so that it is not possible to have both >> opennsl-devel and libressl-devel installed at the same time, since they >> both are the same API. > > That's the very problem that Software Collections endeavors to solve. If > you install a non-standard package that conflicts with OS defaults, > install it as a collection so that end users can choose whether to use > the enhancement or the default, on a per-session basis. Does that mean you end up needing to manage crazy long PATH variables? > >> But if LibreSSL was in /opt then RPM would have no problem having both >> libressl-devel and openssl-devel installed at the same time, and the >> build of PHP could potentially result in mixed implementation of the >> OpenSSL API - e.g. PHP is linked against LibreSSL but also is linked >> against Net-SNMP which is linked against OpenSSL - so that the dynamic >> loader then loads two shared libraries that provide the same API. > > Does Net-SNMP expose the libraries and API it depend on? Does the loader > only link on API signature or does it also look at the library name? > Does Net-SNMP fail if it was built against OpenSSL but is loaded with > LibreSSL? As far as I can tell PHP built against LibreSSL works just fine running with the net-snmp bindings built against OpenSSL however there was a warning in the system log from ld when I tried it. > > --- > This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. > https://www.avast.com/antivirus > > _______________________________________________ > CentOS mailing list > CentOS at centos.org > https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos