RE: [ANNOUNCE] Git v2.36.0-rc0 - Build failure on NonStops

>To: brian m. carlson <sandals@crustytoothpaste.net>; Carlo Marcelo Arenas Belón
><carenas@gmail.com>; rsbecker@nexbridge.com; Junio C Hamano
><gitster@pobox.com>; Git Mailing List <git@vger.kernel.org>; git-
>packagers@googlegroups.com
>Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE] Git v2.36.0-rc0 - Build failure on NonStops
>
>On Tue, Apr 5, 2022 at 1:10 AM brian m. carlson <sandals@crustytoothpaste.net>
>wrote:
>> I didn't consider the case that we had NO_OPENSSL=1 because it seems a
>> bit bizarre to say, "No, I don't want OpenSSL—oh, wait, I do want
>> OpenSSL!"
>
>NO_OPENSSL is definitely strange, for example in macOS it means: do not link with
>openssl if it comes from homebrew or macports, but maybe use the one that
>comes with the system, which happens to be based on openssl anyway (based on
>libressl, boringssl, or even a really old version of openssl, depending on which
>version of the OS you got).
>
>Either way, the choice of using the openssl function this requires could work with
>any of those if provided with the right linker settings, but it doesn't seem worth
>the trouble to do, especially not for rc0.
>
>> This patch also didn't seem necessary for me on Linux when I tested,
>> but of course it might be necessary on some systems, so if it fixes
>> things, I'm in favour.
>
>Not sure if the required changes got somehow dropped in one of the rebases
>after your tests, but it definitely didn't work for me when tested on Linux (using
>debian stable or sid) and I can't see how it would work unless the crypto library is
>pulled in some other way, and even in that case the lack of the header should
>break, at least with DEVELOPER=1.