Re: Linking coreutils against OpenSSL
On Fri, 10 Nov 2023 at 11:54, Matthew Vernon <matthew@debian.org> wrote:
>
> Luca Boccassi <bluca@debian.org> writes:
>
> > On Thu, 9 Nov 2023 at 22:54, Benjamin Barenblat <bbaren@debian.org> wrote:
>
> >> What would you think about having coreutils Depend on libssl3? This
> >> would make the libssl3 package essential, which is potentially
> >> undesirable, but it also has the potential for serious user time savings
> >> (on recent Intel CPUs, OpenSSL’s SHA-256 is over five times faster than
> >> coreutils’ internal implementation).
> >
> > This sounds great. systemd also uses OpenSSL for various things, so
> > libssl3 is pretty much a given on any bootable installation anyway
> > already.
>
> I have no particular opinion on the proposal to make coreutils Depend
> on libssl3; but there are plenty of bootable Debian systems without
> systemd, so I'd like to gently push back on the idea that the only
> bootable Debian systems are those using systemd as init.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Matthew
> [commenting here, but I see at least one repetition of the claim in the
> thread]
If we want to start nitpicking, then let's be exact: 0.61% of popcon.
Whether that qualifies as "plenty" we'll leave as an exercise for the
readers.
Reply to: