[lsb-discuss] crypto discussion

Robert Schweikert robert.schweikert at mathworks.com
Wed Apr 23 14:06:38 PDT 2008

One question from the LSB point of view we will have to answer is 
probably more political than anything else. If we were to add nss (at 
least parts as suggested by Ted) to the LSB are we picking a "winner" in 
the crypto area if we do not also include the openssl library?

I know, we generally add what is ready and requested and openssl does 
not appear to be ready from an API/ABI stability point of view while nss 
is. It is however a matter of perception. I am not arguing to keep nss 
out, just asking a question. I think adding nss would be a step in the 
right direction and we can always add openssl when the API/ABI settles 
down. In addition adding nss might give those who need crypto enough 
functionality even if they have to "port" from using openssl to nss.

Now it may be that nss and openssl have some of the same interfaces and 
we don't care how a distribution provides those as long as they are 
there. But I do not know whether or not this is the case as I am pretty 
much in the dark about what interfaces the various libraries provide.


Robert Schweikert                       MAY THE SOURCE BE WITH YOU
(robert.schweikert at mathworks.com)                 LINUX
The MathWorks Inc.
Phone : 508-647-2042

More information about the lsb-discuss mailing list