[Buildroot] [PATCH v1 8/8] package/openssl: move libopenssl/libressl source statemetns outside of the choice

[Yann E. MORIN]

Peter, All,

On 2024-05-08 17:07 +0200, Peter Seiderer via buildroot spake thusly:
> On Mon, 6 May 2024 22:11:14 +0200, "Yann E. MORIN" <yann.morin.1998 at free.fr> wrote:
> > On 2024-05-06 16:45 +0200, Peter Seiderer via buildroot spake thusly:
[--SNIP--]
> > > @@ -44,13 +42,14 @@ config BR2_PACKAGE_LIBRESSL
> > >  source "$(BASE_DIR)/.br2-external.in.openssl"
> > This leaves one 'source' statement in te choice, which is no longer
> > accepted, AFAIU.
> 'source' is accepted here, but not with all possible content...

Ah, it is still accepted, because you introduced a patch that reverts
the upstream change.

I think that, if we update our kconfig, we do not want to switm against
the current, and we should not try to reintroduce a feature that has
been removed, otherwise, we'll have to carry that for ever...

Instead, we should find a solution that allows us to be closer to
upstream, to ease updating in the future...

> > I think the best solution is to move the if-endif conditional block out
> > of package/libopenssl/Config.in back into package/openssl/Config.in, and
> > add a new choice entry, so that basically we end up with something lie;
[--SNIP--]
> Will test the proposed solution the next days..., alternative solution would be:
> 
>      choice
>          bool "ssl library"
> 
>      config BR2_PACKAGE_LIBOPENSSL
>          bool "openssl"
> 
>      config BR2_PACKAGE_LIBRESSL
>          bool "libressl"
> 
>      source "$(BASE_DIR)/.br2-external.in.openssl-choice"

That's still a source in a choice, and as statred above, we should not
go that route if it is no longe rsupported upstream...

>      endchoice
> 
>      source "package/libopenssl/Config.in"
>      source "package/libressl/Config.in"
>      source "$(BASE_DIR)/.br2-external.in.openssl"
> 
> Splitting the external content into two files (two lines), keeping the 'source'
> of the empty files as default (the first with the choice content, the second
> with the regarding configuration entries)...
> 
> But either way the content of '.br2-external.in.openssl' needs to be
> changed/adjusted...

Detail. We own those scripts, and ugly as they are (I wrote them, blame
me), we can extend them as needed.

Thanks for working on this! :-)

Regards,
Yann E. MORIN.

> Regards,
> Peter
> 
> 
> >
> > Basically, that would make for an uglier state, but that's the best we
> > can do given the new limitsations introduced by upstream kconfig...
> >
> > Thoughts?
> >
> > Regards,
> > Yann E. MORIN.
> >
> > >  config BR2_PACKAGE_HAS_OPENSSL
> > >  	bool
> > >
> > > --
> > > 2.44.0
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > buildroot mailing list
> > > buildroot at buildroot.org
> > > https://lists.buildroot.org/mailman/listinfo/buildroot
> >
> 
> _______________________________________________
> buildroot mailing list
> buildroot at buildroot.org
> https://lists.buildroot.org/mailman/listinfo/buildroot

-- 
.-----------------.--------------------.------------------.--------------------.
|  Yann E. MORIN  | Real-Time Embedded | /"\ ASCII RIBBON | Erics' conspiracy: |
| +33 662 376 056 | Software  Designer | \ / CAMPAIGN     |  ___               |
| +33 561 099 427 `------------.-------:  X  AGAINST      |  \e/  There is no  |
| http://ymorin.is-a-geek.org/ | _/*\_ | / \ HTML MAIL    |   v   conspiracy.  |
'------------------------------^-------^------------------^--------------------'