Re: Patch to compile against Botan 2.x

Hello Jack,

On 09/26/2017 09:47 PM, Jack Lloyd wrote:
> I've attached a patch for building Monotone against Botan 2.x

thanks again and sorry for not getting back to you earlier, as promised.

I committed your patch to net.venge.monotone.botan and continued from
there on. Unfortunately, it didn't quite compile against any newer Botan
version, so I continued to work on it.

Plus, I too started some Botan 1.11 compatibility efforts back some
time.. so now I'm facing two heads on that branch and I'm still in the
process of merging those.

> This isn't quite complete for 2.2, because a lot of Monotone assumes
> Botan::SecureVector is a type, and that botan.h includes more than it
> does in 2.0-2.2.

I added a new header file (src/botan.hh) to deduplicate some of the
conditional imports.

> I made a change upstream
> https://github.com/randombit/botan/commit/3f7dba2c4455bf53dae89d088bd56cdf9b2c94fe
> to make some changes to botan.h to make this patch simpler, and in the
> thought it will likely ease transition for other projects. This will
> be included in 2.3 which is coming out next week.

Cool, thanks. Given this won't appear before 2.3, I think monotone still
needs dedicated includes for e.g. botan/filters.h to support 2.0 - 2.2,
right?

Another unrelated question: You changed a couple of (not necessarily
secure) byte vectors to DataSource_Memory. Whereas I figured I might
simply use a vector<Botan::bytes>. What's the difference?

> Two other relevant pieces of information:
> 
> - All support for Botan 1.10 ends at the end of this year

I don't known about other distros, but it's what Debian stable currently
ships. And given it's just been released, I fear that statement will
hold true for another roughly 2 years.

I think it would make sense to require at least 1.10 from now on and
drop everything older than that. I'm hesitant dropping 1.10 just yet.
What do others think about dropping support for older Botan versions?

> - Botan now uses semantic versioning, so all Botan 2.x releases should
>   be forward compatible. It is anticipated 2.x will be supported until
>   at least 2021.

+1, I welcome that simplification.

Kind Regards

Markus Wanner