4 ms·
Let's assume that a developer wants to distribute a binary build of their application that uses the OpenSSL library that runs on every GNU/Linux system released
by the_why_of_y 10y ago
Let's assume that a developer wants to distribute a binary build of their application that uses the OpenSSL library that runs on every GNU/Linux system released in the last 5 years. As you might know, OpenSSL releases a new ABI-incompatible version of their library every other year or so, and so there are at least 3 different OpenSSL ABIs / SONAMEs available in the distributions the binary build should run on.
So far the only choices available (edit: for desktop applications) are either static linking OpenSSL, or abandon the idea of distro independent binaries.
With FlatPak, OpenSSL can be bundled in the runtime, so multiple applications can depend on the same runtime and share one dynamic library, and benefit from the runtime getting security updates for the monthly OpenSSL CVEs instead of doing that themselves.
- digi_owl 10y agoNow you are looking at distro policy, especially the likes of Debian Stable. If the package manager allows for multiple version of openssl to exist without naming shenanigans, there is nothing stopping a third party package to go on top of Debian Stable and provide the most recent ABI version. In essence you are looking for technical solutions to policy/politics...