Bug 602022 – dev-python/pycryptodome: self-contained cryptographic library for Python (maintained fork of pycrypto)

• Product: Gentoo Linux
• Status: RESOLVED FIXED

[Description Coacher 2016-12-08 18:41:14 UTC]

Hello.

pycryptodome is a continuation and extension of the old and unmaintained pycrypto.

Some of pycryptodome features:
- supports Python 2.4 or newer, all Python 3 versions and PyPy,
- drop-in replacement for the old PyCrypto library,
- supports a variety of crypto algorithms.

Some of the modern python packages already require pycryptodome: bug 601374.
Since the original pycrypto is getting old and pycryptodome can be a drop-in replacement it would be nice to have pycryptodome in tree.

Please add pycryptodome to the tree and make it an alternative to the old pycrypto.

[Comment 1 Rodrigo Saboya 2017-01-15 00:16:01 UTC]

Created attachment 460080 [details]
initial ebuild

Attached is an ebuild that works. In the existence of a file named .separate_namespace in the setup.py dir, it installs compiles in a separate namespace instead of the same as pycrypto, making it possible for both to co-exist.

I've tested it with streamlink-0.2.0 (not in tree) and it works. The correct path is probably to create a virtual/python-crypto package and make packages depend on it for a smooth transition for pycrypto to pycryptodome.

This is just a initial ebuild that probably contains lots of errors, so if you're using it, do it at your own risk.

[Comment 2 Coacher 2017-01-15 13:20:00 UTC]

(In reply to Rodrigo Saboya from comment #1)
> Attached is an ebuild that works. In the existence of a file named
> .separate_namespace in the setup.py dir, it installs compiles in a separate
> namespace instead of the same as pycrypto, making it possible for both to
> co-exist.
> 
> I've tested it with streamlink-0.2.0 (not in tree) and it works. The correct
> path is probably to create a virtual/python-crypto package and make packages
> depend on it for a smooth transition for pycrypto to pycryptodome.
If you have pycryptodome in a separate namespace and pycrypto is installed, streamlink (and most likely everything else) uses pycrypto. Virtual is much needed here.

[Comment 3 Rodrigo Saboya 2017-01-15 16:19:25 UTC]

(In reply to Coacher from comment #2)
> (In reply to Rodrigo Saboya from comment #1)
> > Attached is an ebuild that works. In the existence of a file named
> > .separate_namespace in the setup.py dir, it installs compiles in a separate
> > namespace instead of the same as pycrypto, making it possible for both to
> > co-exist.
> > 
> > I've tested it with streamlink-0.2.0 (not in tree) and it works. The correct
> > path is probably to create a virtual/python-crypto package and make packages
> > depend on it for a smooth transition for pycrypto to pycryptodome.
> If you have pycryptodome in a separate namespace and pycrypto is installed,
> streamlink (and most likely everything else) uses pycrypto. Virtual is much
> needed here.

Streamlink 0.2.0 won't work without pycryptodome. I patched Streamlink to use the namespaced Cryptodome instead of Crypto to not mess with other RDEPS (which, in my system, is only ansible).

[Comment 4 Coacher 2017-01-15 16:29:41 UTC]

(In reply to Rodrigo Saboya from comment #3)
> Streamlink 0.2.0 won't work without pycryptodome.
It works fine without it here. setup.py requires it though.

> I patched Streamlink to
> use the namespaced Cryptodome instead of Crypto to not mess with other RDEPS
> (which, in my system, is only ansible).
Cool. It'd be nice if you'd submit your patch upstream.

[Comment 5 Rodrigo Saboya 2017-01-15 16:40:47 UTC]

(In reply to Coacher from comment #4)
> (In reply to Rodrigo Saboya from comment #3)
> > Streamlink 0.2.0 won't work without pycryptodome.
> It works fine without it here. setup.py requires it though.
> 
> > I patched Streamlink to
> > use the namespaced Cryptodome instead of Crypto to not mess with other RDEPS
> > (which, in my system, is only ansible).
> Cool. It'd be nice if you'd submit your patch upstream.

I don't believe the namespaced cryptodome is a path upstream would like to pursue. Cryptodome is a fork and drop-in replacement for pycrypto. And making optional isn't very clean either. I believe Streamlink is correct, my patch was for my own testing purposes only.

[Comment 6 Thomas Deutschmann (RETIRED) 2017-01-20 16:44:35 UTC]

https://github.com/gentoo/gentoo/pull/2975

[Comment 7 Michał Górny 2017-02-28 12:42:36 UTC]

@Python, pycrypto is dead and buried, so I think it's time we do something about it. Considering that it has quite a few revdeps [1], I think switching to a maintained fork is a reasonable solution.

The question is: whether do we want to add pycryptodome as separate package, and convert existing consumers to ||/virtual, or just put it as continuation of dev-python/pycrypto.

[1]:https://qa-reports.gentoo.org/output/genrdeps/rindex/dev-python/pycrypto

[Comment 8 Mike Gilbert 2017-02-28 17:24:06 UTC]

(In reply to Michał Górny from comment #7)
> The question is: whether do we want to add pycryptodome as separate package,
> and convert existing consumers to ||/virtual, or just put it as continuation
> of dev-python/pycrypto.

It's listed under a separate project name on pypi, and installs pycryptodome-*.egg-info. I think we need to add it as a package separate from pycrypto.

[Comment 9 Michał Górny 2017-03-01 07:48:20 UTC]

commit 5079b5bcc0ab71b4bb5a228aede0b34bd9bbc710
Author:     Michał Górny <[e-mail]>
AuthorDate: Wed Mar 1 08:46:17 2017
Commit:     Michał Górny <[e-mail]>
CommitDate: Wed Mar 1 08:47:51 2017

    dev-python/pycryptodome: Initial commit, #602022
    
    Initial commit for dev-python/pycrypto fork and partially drop-in
    replacement. Let's start with a simple, separate package and see how it
    works out for us.