Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Aliases: add openssl #47034

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Nov 21, 2019
Merged

Aliases: add openssl #47034

merged 1 commit into from Nov 21, 2019

Conversation

fxcoudert
Copy link
Member

@fxcoudert fxcoudert commented Nov 21, 2019

Following #46876, should we make openssl an alias for openssl@1.1? Is this breaking things for people who have the older formula installed?

Edit: the technical question is not “is this desirable?”, but “would this break things for some users?”. Input needed from experts in how brew code itself will handle this situation.

@fxcoudert fxcoudert added the maintainer feedback label Nov 21, 2019
@austinirvine
Copy link

@austinirvine austinirvine commented Nov 21, 2019

Yeah, I think openssl should be made an alias for 1.1. I think it would make a lot of sense for the latest, most stable release of openssl to point back to openssl formula. Users should be able to determine which version they want to use by simply deciding which version of the openssl formula they want to use. Most other formulas work this way. I think it would cause far less hassle for developers. -- I've been running into problems all day with openssl come to find out that the formula is gone. This could be a bit baffling to newbies given that most answers/tutorials on the web point back to the openssl formula. It definitely changes the process flow of work where I'm at as well.

@lhazlewood
Copy link

@lhazlewood lhazlewood commented Nov 21, 2019

FWIW, on most (all?) major Linux distros (and for sure CentOS and Ubuntu), the package name for default openssl installs is just openssl. It'd be nice for Homebrew to use the same so we don't have to differentiate between distributions to determine which package to install. So this PR has a nice 👍 from me :)

@fxcoudert fxcoudert requested review from MikeMcQuaid and jonchang Nov 21, 2019
@iMichka
Copy link
Member

@iMichka iMichka commented Nov 21, 2019

I'm am fine with the alias, if it helps some people. I have no clue about the technical implications though.

If we go the alias route, does this mean the situation will stay like this forever. Or does this leave us the opportunity to rename the file and revision bump everything later?

@fxcoudert
Copy link
Member Author

@fxcoudert fxcoudert commented Nov 21, 2019

Local tests seem to say it's fine with preexisting OpenSSL 1.0 installed as openssl. So… let's go!

@ergl
Copy link
Contributor

@ergl ergl commented Nov 26, 2019

How does this affect people with OpenSSL 1.0? If I install the new openssl package while still having the old one, will something break?

@Bo98
Copy link
Member

@Bo98 Bo98 commented Nov 26, 2019

It depends a bit if you have anything that needs 1.0. Certainly nothing in homebrew-core alone requires OpenSSL 1.0 anymore.

@ronisbr
Copy link
Contributor

@ronisbr ronisbr commented Nov 26, 2019

In fact, I think MSSQL ODBC driver requires openssl 1.0. I have a new installation that I cannot use this driver because a file for openssl 1.0 is missing. How can I install the older version?

@Bo98
Copy link
Member

@Bo98 Bo98 commented Nov 26, 2019

There's an upstream discussion about that: microsoft/homebrew-mssql-release#37. 1.1 should work according to them but perhaps you can help them debug.

@Homebrew Homebrew deleted a comment from trmaphi Nov 27, 2019
@MikeMcQuaid
Copy link
Member

@MikeMcQuaid MikeMcQuaid commented Nov 27, 2019

The supported way to still use OpenSSL 1.0 is to use brew extract. brew installing from a URL is insecure and will break.

@Homebrew Homebrew locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators Nov 27, 2019
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
maintainer feedback
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

10 participants