On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 4:45 PM, Paul Howarth <paul(a)city-fan.org
On 22/11/15 15:28, Denis Fateyev wrote:
On Sun, Nov 22, 2015 at 5:20 PM, Paul Howarth <paul(a)city-fan.org
As a data point of interest, I unbundled libtomcrypt from
when it became possible:
Thanks for the answer. Under these circumstances I should
unbundle it too.
By the way, the last official "libtomcrypt" release happened
more than 5
years ago. There was no new official release since that and it's
a bit of
problem due a lot of historical code and changes were made after
(hundreds of commits). I'll try to contact libtom people on
they will bother to prepare a new release.
Did you make any progress with the perl-CryptX packaging? It has now
become a dependency of perl-Net-SSH-Perl, so I'd like to see it in
Not really, since I had to unbundle "libtomcrypt" and "libtommath"
as mentioned above, and it takes some time which I don't have right now.
CryptX won't go well with the "libtomcrypt" packaged in Fedora, since
the packaged version is too aged.
Before updating "libtomcrypt" we also have to update "libtommath"
and "tomsfastmath" .
The "libtommath" update has been tested for Fedora pretty well  and
can be updated easily, but as for other two more work on preparing new
versions, testing and packaging is required.
Considering all of this, the "proper" unbundled CryptX version cannot be
prepared right now, although we can solve dependencies step by step.
As for the plans, next month I'm going to start testing "tomsfastmath"
in order to help with preparing a new release. After that, the same way
with "libtomcrypt", and then CryptX.
I talked to Karel, the CryptX's author, and we agreed that a configure
switch which allows to use "libtomcrypt" system library would be useful,
so in perspective the unbundling process should be even less problematic.
Given the relaxation in library bundling rules for Fedora now, is a
perl-CryptX package now viable?