Hi,
> > FWIW ssize_t is a POSIX type, so... the bug isn't in OpenSSL.. ;-)
>
> I don't know if NeXT claims to be POSIX compliant, but Windows
> certainly never was.
No, NeXT doesn't claim to be POSIX compliant, in fact the POSIX-Support from NeXT/Apple is completely broken in NEXTSTEP and
On Sun, Mar 12, 2000 at 12:19:17AM +0200, Vasile GABURICI wrote:
This creates problems on systems like RedHat that store all man pages in a
common place like /usr/man. This effectively prevented me from making a
nice RPM.
Any comments on this?
Where do those of you who create packages for
Rajeev Chawla wrote:
Hi,
I am writing a non-blocking server using openssl 0.9.5.
I noticed that this version added support for a hardware
accelerator - compaq's atalla card. I am interested
in using this accelerator with my non-blocking server.
However, I see a problem - it breaks the
I've seen other RPMs that place man pages in a separate directory,
like /var/ssl/man. But that requires manual change to MANPATH... Not the
RedHat way :-)
On Mon, 13 Mar 2000, [iso-8859-1] Ulf Möller wrote:
On Sun, Mar 12, 2000 at 12:19:17AM +0200, Vasile GABURICI wrote:
This
I believe there is a X509_NAME_ENTRY_set_data() bug in 0.9.5 that is
triggered by X509_NAME_ENTRY_create_by_NID() when called with
'type' set to V_ASN1_APP_CHOOSE.
Here's the diff between 0.9.4 and 0.9.5 for X509_NAME_ENTRY_set_data():
int X509_NAME_ENTRY_set_data(X509_NAME_ENTRY *ne, int
Brian Korver wrote:
I believe there is a X509_NAME_ENTRY_set_data() bug in 0.9.5 that is
triggered by X509_NAME_ENTRY_create_by_NID() when called with
'type' set to V_ASN1_APP_CHOOSE.
Here's the diff between 0.9.4 and 0.9.5 for X509_NAME_ENTRY_set_data():
int
I believe there is a X509_NAME_ENTRY_set_data() bug in 0.9.5 that is
triggered by X509_NAME_ENTRY_create_by_NID() when called with
'type' set to V_ASN1_APP_CHOOSE.
Here's the diff between 0.9.4 and 0.9.5 for X509_NAME_ENTRY_set_data():
int X509_NAME_ENTRY_set_data(X509_NAME_ENTRY *ne, int
roessler The first design problem I see with the smime tool is the
roessler fact that it apparently tries to do most of the MIME
roessler handling itself. From my point of view, I'd greatly
roessler appreciate some mode which essentially looks like PGP's
roessler detached signatures, and doesn't
On 2000-03-14 07:37:49 +0100, Richard Levitte - VMS
Whacker wrote:
Personally I don't see the problem with getting the
correct mime headers served by smime and just graft
them in among all the others, but YMMV.
While this may be fine for the simplest applications, it's
not reasonable in a
