[zeromq-dev] TLS (bare with me)

Wes Young wes at barely3am.com
Sat Feb 25 14:55:15 CET 2012

On 2012-02-24, at 5:12 PM, john skaller wrote:

> So I am guessing various LGPL licences (without linking exemption).

haven't gotten to the licensing issues yet (if any between gnutls and libzmq). Whatever I publish is usually BSD so you can do whatever your want with it.

> Depends on? libnettle? lbgmp?

another reason i went with 2.8.6 was to avoid libnettle (in exchange for getting it to compile on debian squeeze first). nettle didn't make an appearance till gnutls 2.10 or 3? I do have libgmp installed, didn't check to see if it was libgmp was a dep or not (http://packages.debian.org/source/squeeze/gnutls26)

down the road, once we figure this out, 3.x starts to support DTLS (tls+udp, etc..) which (i think) will make the async io stuff even faster and more flexible.

i have a design question (purely out of curiosity) though:

what was the reasoning for doing libzmq in C++ rather than C?. Esp when we're wrapping a C api around it anyway? I understand OO programming can be easier sometimes, etc.. just curious if there was a specific design decision that went into it or that (that' i'm just missing) it's just the way it evolved..

the lib is def very well documented and written, it's just a little funny (also with all the .hpp's mixed with the .cpp's instead of using things like an include/ directory, etc… I'm guessing an artifact of visual studio?).

again, just curious.


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 203 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
URL: <https://lists.zeromq.org/pipermail/zeromq-dev/attachments/20120225/05c82a99/attachment.sig>

More information about the zeromq-dev mailing list