Further investigation shows this issue affects both qt and kdelibs now, so would request this be addressed in F-7 as well. +++ This bug was initially created as a clone of Bug #429846 +++ Due to licensing issues, kdelibs dlopens openssl instead of linking. In order to make this work, kdelibs needs to know the soname of both libcrypto and libssl. Upstream kdelibs *tries* to use libssl.so.SHLIB_VERSION_NUMBER (and libcrypto.so.SHLIB_VERSION_NUMBER) as defined by openssl/opensslv.h header. Unfortunately, this doesn't work, since SHLIB_VERSION_NUMBER=0.9.8 and the soname in rawhide is named libssl.so.0.9.8g In order to workaround this, we're currently having to patch kdelibs to hardcode looking for libssl.so.0.9.8g/libssl.so.7 Is the value of SHLIB_VERSION_NUMBER incorrect? Is this usage/expection of SHLIB_VERSION_NUMBER to name sonames invalid? Any suggestions on how to make this work better? -- Additional comment from tmraz on 2008-01-23 09:07 EST -- The file name in rawhide has to be ....0.9.8g otherwise it would conflict with potential compat libraries with different SONAME. We should probably patch the SHLIB_VERSION_NUMBER to reflect that but it could theoretically break other things as I don't know how 3rd party apps use this macro. But don't ask me what I think about dlopening openssl libraries to overcome the GPL incompatibility. So this will not be a priority for me to solve. kdelibs should instead use GPL or GPL compatible licensed code for SSL. Such as nss_compat_ossl library. -- Additional comment from rdieter.edu on 2008-01-23 09:11 EST -- Interested in exposing SHLIB_SONAMEVER (in opensslv.h or somewhere) as referenced in openssl-0.9.8g-soversion.patch ? That could serve nicely. -- Additional comment from tmraz on 2008-01-23 10:13 EST -- I could add that but will it really help you? It will not be in openssl upstream so KDE cannot depend on it. -- Additional comment from rdieter.edu on 2008-01-23 10:24 EST -- fair nuf, I'll try pinging both openssl, kde upstreams and see how best to address this. -- Additional comment from rdieter.edu on 2008-01-23 11:21 EST -- fyi, http://marc.info/?l=openssl-users&m=120110500517612&w=2 -- Additional comment from tmraz on 2008-01-23 17:51 EST -- The soname is actually libssl.so.7 - we patch it to be so otherwise it would be libssl.so.0 - we do this because the abi is not stable so we almost always have to bump sonames on version upgrades The file name is libssl.so.0.9.8g - again we patch it this way otherwise it would be libssl.so.0.9.8 - again we do this so multiple openssl versions (with potentially different ABI) could be installed together. This makes us (not upstream) to be not in sync with SHLIB_SONAMEVER. So this question doesn't make much sense to be reported upstream. As I wrote we could/should probably patch the SHLIB_SONAMEVER to be 0.9.8g but there is a small possibility it might break things. -- Additional comment from rdieter.edu on 2008-01-23 22:04 EST -- Thanks for the clarification. I don't care so much about SHLIB_SONAMEVER, it's the value of SHLIB_VERSION_NUMBER that I'm more interested in, since that is what (upstream) kdelibs uses to determine the name of the shlib(s) to dlopen. -- Additional comment from rdieter.edu on 2008-01-23 22:08 EST -- My take/wish: fix SHLIB_VERSION_NUMBER to match reality. 3rd-parties that use this are broken in the status-quo (e.g. kdelibs). -- Additional comment from tmraz on 2008-01-24 03:02 EST -- (In reply to comment #7) > I don't care so much about SHLIB_SONAMEVER, it's the value of > SHLIB_VERSION_NUMBER that I'm more interested in, since that is what (upstream) > kdelibs uses to determine the name of the shlib(s) to dlopen. Oops, I meant SHLIB_VERSION_NUMBER instead of SHLIB_SONAMEVER in the comment 6. -- Additional comment from tmraz on 2008-01-26 15:40 EST -- Fixed, let's see what breaks - if anything.
shrug, too close to EOL, not worth it, WONTFIX.