Original requestor is willing to let it drop, and nobody else has asked about
this so closing it.
__
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
Development Mailing List
Original requestor is willing to let it drop, and nobody else has asked about
this so closing it.
__
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
Development Mailing List
Richard Levitte via RT [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I'm honestly very unsure about this one. After all, openssl ca
already covers this, so I wonder why there's a need to create another
way to do the same thing, and add to the confusion on how to do things..
.
How would you use openssl ca to
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] on Wed, 31 Mar 2004 11:23:29 +0200 (METDST), Simon
Josefsson via RT [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
rt
rt Richard Levitte via RT [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
rt
rt I'm honestly very unsure about this one. After all, openssl ca
rt already covers this, so I wonder why
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] on Wed, 31 Mar 2004 11:23:29 +0200 (METDST), Simon
Josefsson via RT [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
rt
rt Richard Levitte via RT [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
rt
rt I'm honestly very unsure about this one. After all, openssl ca
rt already covers this, so I wonder why
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] on Wed, 31 Mar 2004 11:51:13 +0200 (CEST), Richard
Levitte - VMS Whacker [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
levitte In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] on Wed, 31 Mar 2004 11:23:29 +0200 (METDST),
Simon Josefsson via RT [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
levitte
levitte rt
levitte rt Richard
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] on Wed, 31 Mar 2004 11:51:13 +0200 (CEST), Richard
Levitte - VMS Whacker [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
levitte In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] on Wed, 31 Mar 2004 11:23:29 +0200 (METDST),
Simon Josefsson via RT [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
levitte
levitte rt
levitte rt Richard
I'm honestly very unsure about this one. After all, openssl ca
already covers this, so I wonder why there's a need to create another
way to do the same thing, and add to the confusion on how to do things..
.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] - Thu Apr 25 16:20:45 2002]:
What about the patch below for
What about the patch below for 0.9.6d? Doc patch as well:
--- x509.pod.orig Mon Jan 14 12:03:55 2002
+++ x509.podMon Jan 14 12:03:35 2002
@@ -43,6 +43,7 @@
[B-CAkey filename]
[B-CAcreateserial]
[B-CAserial filename]
+[B-noselfsign]
[B-text]
[B-C]
[B-md2|-md5|-sha1|-mdc2]
@@
This patch that allows you to override the check for a valid self-signed
certificate when signing certs using 'x509 -CA'. I find this useful for
those times when you edit certs with M-x hexl-mode.
--- x509.c.orig Mon Jan 14 11:41:05 2002
+++ x509.c Mon Jan 14 11:41:41 2002
@@ -122,6
From: Simon Josefsson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
jas This patch that allows you to override the check for a valid self-signed
jas certificate when signing certs using 'x509 -CA'. I find this useful for
jas those times when you edit certs with M-x hexl-mode.
I'm wondering if OpenSSL shouldn't be
On Wed, 16 Jan 2002, Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker wrote:
From: Simon Josefsson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
jas This patch that allows you to override the check for a valid self-signed
jas certificate when signing certs using 'x509 -CA'. I find this useful for
jas those times when you edit certs
Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker wrote:
From: Simon Josefsson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
jas This patch that allows you to override the check for a valid self-signed
jas certificate when signing certs using 'x509 -CA'. I find this useful for
jas those times when you edit certs with M-x hexl-mode.
13 matches
Mail list logo