Hi Otto, 1) You gave me a good idea. I will file issues using the information in debian/upstream/metadata, if available. Most of the time, I look for the upstream location in the watch file, look for patches, or send myself. 2) I think this is super valuable, we want to ensure our SRUs or security updates do not change the ABI. I was exploring libabigail to detect ABI changes but soon realized I’d need to write a good suppression specification (https://sourceware.org/libabigail/manual/suppression-specifications.html) for it to be useful. This will take some time, so I’ll revisit it after the OpenSSL 4 transition. If you would like to send a patch to Ubuntu, I'll be happy to review it. Regards Ravi On Wed, Jun 3, 2026 at 2:09 PM Otto Kekäläinen <otto@ubuntu.com> wrote: > > Hi, > > > I am targeting OpenSSL 4 for Ubuntu 26.10 Stonking Stingray Release. > > Thanks Ravi for driving this. A couple of questions: > > 1) OpenSSL 4.0 was released on April 14th. I bet most upstreams are > only now becoming aware that there is a new OpenSSL version and > adapting to it in their next release. Do you have some way to reaching > out to all upstreams to make sure they are aware of OpenSSL 4.0 and > have an issue filed for tracking 4.0 compatibility? > > 2) Currently OpenSSL is packaged in a way that the symbols file that > is supposed to track ABI stability is practically empty, see > https://salsa.debian.org/debian/openssl/-/blob/debian/unstable/debian/libssl3t64.symbols. > Do you see value in populating this with the actual symbols? I did it > last year in https://salsa.debian.org/otto/openssl/-/commit/1403b82459516de60532fe629ea72bf9105157ea > but the symbols list gets very long. Do you think this would be > valuable, should I continue pursuing it? -- ubuntu-devel mailing list ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
