00:04 <ioraff> does anyone have an opinion on making a separate package for libretls?

00:09 <wael[m]> does libretls even exist

00:09 <ioraff> it's included with the openssl package

00:21 <wael[m]> what the fuck

00:21 <wael[m]> im sorry libressl is openssl replacement and openssh is openbsd and now openssl has LIBREtls

00:21 <midfavila> >LibreSSL is outdated

00:21 <midfavila> >but quick guys we need to take all of the tech from LibreSSL and put it into OpenSSL!

00:22 <midfavila> *very* basado

00:24 <ioraff> to be clear, libretls is not a part of openssl. it's an implementation of libtls for openssl, and is included in the kiss openssl package.

00:39 <sad_plan> seeing as glib-networking has an option for openssl, should one be able to switch out gnutls for the openssl? or would that just leave you without the neccessary libs? :p

00:41 <sad_plan> the end goal is to then use it for webkit in any case. I dont have any usecase for glib-networking besides that anyway

04:07 <testuser[m]12> Hi

04:08 <ioraff> hi

04:08 <testuser[m]12> ioraff: is it used by anything other than cat girl

04:08 <ioraff> msmtp

04:09 <testuser[m]12> it should probably be in community then

04:09 <testuser[m]12> Or extra

04:10 <testuser[m]12> msmtp seems to have a switch so it's probably optional

04:13 <ioraff> it is optional, but it's either libtls, gnutls, or nothing. upstream recommends against libssl for whatever reason.

04:13 <ioraff> I think it should be in extra

04:14 <ioraff> ffmpeg can also use it instead of libssl

04:15 <testuser[m]12> But what's the use if ffmpeg can work fine with default openssl libs

04:24 <ioraff> don't need to, just saying

06:21 <ehawkvu> cem: https://github.com/ehawkvu/fbsd-repo/releases/tag/13.1-2022.08

06:30 <ehawkvu> also any thoughts on how to fix these errors?

06:30 <ehawkvu> https://github.com/ehawkvu/fbsd-repo#current-error

13:27 <vouivre> ioraff: about gnutls and libtls for msmtp

13:27 <vouivre> https://github.com/marlam/msmtp-mirror/issues/37

13:35 <phoebos> i would appreciate libretls being a separate package, wherever it is

15:25 <midfavila> song(s) of the day suggestion, acheam: https://inv.riverside.rocks/watch?v=HL_3D4b3UZM

15:50 <midfavila> thank uwu~

16:14 <noocsharp> msmtp recommends against libssl because it's marlam doesn't want to maintain it, so it will dropped at some point

16:15 <noocsharp> oh nvm, vouivre's link says as much

16:21 <testuser[m]12> Programs built with the V compiler no longer leak memory by default.

16:44 <rohan> someone here other than dilyn uses toybox?

17:28 <Ogromny> testuser[m]12: V lang is shit imo, the author is dumb AF

17:29 <Ogromny> He banned people because he didn't want to answer questions

17:32 <wael[m]> what the fuck i thought v was cool

17:32 <omanom6> i mean, if we're being honest with ourselves here the reason dylan stepped "back" from KISS Linux is because he didn't want to answer questions. Different reactions, sure, but stemming from the same motivation. Without context, this doesn't make the author dumb. It also doesn't make the language itself shit.

17:38 <Ogromny> wael[m]: The langage can be pretty cool but the author has taken poor decisions

17:41 <Ogromny> omanom6: Yeah but I mean, V authour didn't accept any criticism, make extravagant cleams about V

17:44 <Ogromny> https://www.reddit.com/r/ProgrammingLanguages/comments/ozd3ma/vlang_has_been_opensourced_and_is_trending_on/

17:44 <omanom6> did he ever make any guarantees that he /would/?

17:45 <Ogromny> Would accept criticism ?

17:45 <omanom6> right. "accept criticism" sounds a lot like "make these changes that i want you to"... is that the case?

17:46 <omanom6> or is "accept criticism" more along the lines of people going, ex., "hey there's a big security vulnerability in your code <here> that you should address"

17:46 <Ogromny> Yep the second case

18:58 <vouivre> noocsharp: with "nvm" you mean "nevermind" ?

19:04 <wael[m]>

19:04 <wael[m]> Non Volatile Memory

19:09 <vouivre> ok, it's unexpected. So in this case I don't get the meaning.

19:10 <wael[m]> that was a joke i hope you didnt take that seriously

19:10 <wael[m]> its actually nevermind

19:20 <vouivre> I was 50-50 ;-)

19:21 <vouivre> thank you :-)

20:28 <sad_plan> hi

20:29 <sad_plan> rohan: partially. im not done getting things up and running on my main setup. how come?

20:29 <omanom6> hi!

20:42 <rohan> sad_plan: im thinking in switch to toybox but dont know if will break too much packages

20:44 <sad_plan> should be fine. it does have some quirks, but nothing that should make it unusable imo. if something is utterly broken, you can always use busybox for that, or something else.

20:54 <vouivre> exit

21:55 <Sigmw_> Sup!

22:33 <Torr> rohan: Besides licensing, what's the difference between Busybox?

22:34 <Torr> between Busybox and* it?

22:41 <wael[m]> half the size

22:45 <Torr> Interesting

22:47 <wael[m]> ***in sloc

22:49 <rohan> size and sloc

22:49 <rohan> is the other difference

22:57 <Torr> Does it has a Make applet?

22:58 <wael[m]> ?wdym

22:59 <Torr> In Toybox, is there a "toybox make" subcommand?

23:00 <illiliti> no

23:00 <illiliti> why do you need one if there's pdpmake?

23:02 <Torr> I don't, just curious how far into self bootstrapping they are.

23:04 <illiliti> they require make with gnu extensions in order to bootstrap

23:04 <illiliti> and bash

23:04 <illiliti> so they aren't really

23:04 <Torr> Dear me