Openssl: built-in or ports?

[Ryan Schmidt]

On Apr 2, 2009, at 12:26, Rainer Müller wrote:

> On 2009-04-02 19:17, David Evans wrote:
>> For some ports, licensing is dependent on variant selected.  For
>> instance, ffmpeg
>> is GPL by default but is LGPL if the +no_gpl variant is specified
>> causing GPL modules to be disabled.
>
> Good catch.
>
>> This would work in these cases if it is acceptable to declare  
>> licenses
>> in a variant definition clause.
>
> Should be no problem to use licenses-delete and licenses-append in
> variants. But my proposed NoMirror or mirror.restricted would  
> always be
> for all distfiles, as I don't think we need to make it more specific.

Here's an idea: we could make a variable mirror.only, being similar  
to the existing variable extract.only. If not all files may be  
mirrored, you can list the ones that may be mirrored in mirror.only,  
or set mirror.only to empty if none may be mirrored.

That doesn't address binary files, since I don't know what filenames  
our binaries would have. And I think a simple yes/no flag would be  
more appropriate for whether binaries may be distributed, since it  
could vary by variant, so it would be most simple to be able to set  
that flag in the particular variant. e.g. for freetype:

variant bytecode description {Build bytecode interpreter into the  
TrueType driver} {
	create_binaries no
	...
}

I don't like "mirror.restricted yes" to restrict mirroring; I'd  
rather make it a positive statement, like "mirror.allowed no" or  
"distfiles.mirror no". "mirror.restricted yes" feels like having a  
checkbox that says "[X] Don't mirror" (read: "Yes, don't mirror");  
checkboxes (or other Booleans) with negative wording are confusing.  
Simper: "[ ] Mirror"