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

Permit unbundling the library #190

Closed
clausecker opened this issue Mar 2, 2023 · 7 comments
Closed

Permit unbundling the library #190

clausecker opened this issue Mar 2, 2023 · 7 comments
Labels
help wanted Extra attention is needed

Comments

@clausecker
Copy link

I am currently trying to write a FreeBSD port (i.e. distribution package) for the rosenpass project. In the process of doing that I noticed that it bundles a static copy of liboqs through your crate. This is unfortunate. We would strongly prefer if the project instead linked against liboqs.so so we can fix potential security issues in a single place.

Would it be possible for you to permit linking against a shared library instead of building and linking your own static copy of the code?

@thomwiggers
Copy link
Member

This should be possible by letting oqs-sys' build.rs find liboqs and its header files. We should probably do a vendor style feature like the openssl-sys crate.

However, I do not have time to make the required changes to do this right now. I would review and potentially merge a PR, but it would also need to expand CI to cover these new build scenarios.

@thomwiggers thomwiggers added the help wanted Extra attention is needed label Mar 3, 2023
@clausecker
Copy link
Author

Thank you. Unfortunately I do not have any Rust experience, so I'll not be able to assist you with this.

@tranzystorekk
Copy link
Contributor

I took a quick glance at this out of curiosity, but liboqs doesn't seem to provide a pkg-config file, and cmake scripts alone aren't easily read from build.rs :/

@wucke13
Copy link
Contributor

wucke13 commented May 6, 2023

Now that @tranzystorek-io provided open-quantum-safe/liboqs#1435 which was merged (thank you!!!), I think the discussion should continue here. @thomwiggers are there any specific requirements for such a PR? So far I only got

  • has to be checked by CI

@thomwiggers
Copy link
Member

This should be fixed by #190 right?

@clausecker
Copy link
Author

@thomwiggers This here is issue #190, so I'm not sure what you meant to link.

@thomwiggers
Copy link
Member

My bad, #211

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
help wanted Extra attention is needed
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants