Opened 10 years ago
Last modified 8 years ago
#41973 new enhancement
Add "enable-ec_nistp_64_gcc_128" variant to openssl?
| Reported by: | jlg89 | Owned by: | larryv (Lawrence Velázquez) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Priority: | Normal | Milestone: | |
| Component: | ports | Version: | |
| Keywords: | Cc: | neverpanic (Clemens Lang), jul_bsd@…, vergus@… | |
| Port: | openssl |
Description
The need for accelerated NIST P-224 and P-256 encryption support is growing. Would it be possible to add the "enable-ec_nistp_64_gcc_128" configure option as a variant to the openssl port?
Attachments (1)
Change History (9)
comment:1 Changed 10 years ago by mf2k (Frank Schima)
| Owner: | changed from macports-tickets@… to mww@… |
|---|---|
| Type: | request → enhancement |
| Version: | 2.2.1 |
comment:2 Changed 10 years ago by jmroot (Joshua Root)
No need for a variant I would think, better to just enable it always on x86_64?
comment:3 Changed 10 years ago by jmroot (Joshua Root)
Some things to note:
- this requires
__uint128_t, which is not available in gcc < 4.4 - the code is under a different license (Apache 2.0) to the rest of openssl, which messes up our license checking for GPL + openssl exception
So maybe a variant isn’t a bad idea after all.
comment:5 Changed 10 years ago by jul_bsd@…
- patch with variant. don't know how to restrict to gcc>=4.4
- destroot ok
- add as default: to confirm to be safe and improve performances
Changed 10 years ago by jul_bsd@…
| Attachment: | patch-openssl-Portfile.diff added |
|---|
comment:7 Changed 9 years ago by jmroot (Joshua Root)
| Cc: | cal@… added |
|---|---|
| Owner: | changed from mww@… to larryv@… |
comment:8 Changed 8 years ago by neverpanic (Clemens Lang)
Debian always enables this on amd64 machines, and so should we, I think. Debian doesn't seem to care about the license difference, so they apparently assume it's compatible with the OpenSSL license terms.
I think we should enable this for all machines that support __uint128_t; should we just check $build_arch for x86_64 and enable it for this architecture?
I also don't understand why the patch adds the variant to the default variants if it is already enabled.
Larry, what do you think?
In the future, please Cc the port maintainers (
port info --maintainers openssl).