Hi All,
I would like to add 3 points
1/ please add to the list Windows CE = 5.0 / Windows Mobile = 6
2/ MAY add a compatibility statement as this, for ANY platform :
- compile with THOSE development environmentS,
- run on THOSE runtime platforms (hardware/ Os / emulators)
- run on some
Hello,Pierre Delaage
Have you seen My Attached images .Screenshot Of Emulator.
i dont Know Which is Problem?
how casn i Solve this?Is There any problem in .LIb and in .DLL?
How Can i Test This Two Libs and Dll?
Please Ravi,
stop jumping on any post I make on various thread to get us back to
your WCE concern.
I am working on it...don't worry, but it will not get faster, and you
will find no help from others,
by polluting other threads with that particular subject which is of
interest for some of
Typo has been fixed now, ticket resolved.
Steve.
--
Dr Stephen N. Henson. OpenSSL project core developer.
Commercial tech support now available see: http://www.openssl.org
__
OpenSSL Project
Was fixed some time ago, ticket resolved.
Steve.
--
Dr Stephen N. Henson. OpenSSL project core developer.
Commercial tech support now available see: http://www.openssl.org
__
OpenSSL Project
I've added a workaround to the OpenSSL 1.0.2 and master branches: if you use
-nocerts and -certfile you can control the order of certificates in the PKCS#7
structure.
Steve.
--
Dr Stephen N. Henson. OpenSSL project core developer.
Commercial tech support now available see: http://www.openssl.org
Fixed now, ticket resolved.
Steve.
--
Dr Stephen N. Henson. OpenSSL project core developer.
Commercial tech support now available see: http://www.openssl.org
__
OpenSSL Project
Hi,
Which platforms are deprecaded an could/should be removed in the
sourcecode?
MS-DOS?
Windows 16 Bit?
OS/2?
Windows 95/98/ME?
Windows NT/2000/XP?
Necessary criteria for a platform to be included in the first list would be:
* Currency, i.e. a platform is widely
On Mon, Jun 2, 2014 at 9:38 AM, stefan.n...@t-online.de
stefan.n...@t-online.de wrote:
Hi,
Which platforms are deprecaded an could/should be removed in the
sourcecode?
MS-DOS?
Windows 16 Bit?
OS/2?
Windows 95/98/ME?
Windows NT/2000/XP?
Necessary criteria
As indicated ticket resolved.
Steve.
--
Dr Stephen N. Henson. OpenSSL project core developer.
Commercial tech support now available see: http://www.openssl.org
__
OpenSSL Project
On Mon, Jun 2, 2014 at 9:53 AM, Jeff Trawick traw...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Jun 2, 2014 at 9:38 AM, stefan.n...@t-online.de
stefan.n...@t-online.de wrote:
Hi,
Which platforms are deprecaded an could/should be removed in the
sourcecode?
MS-DOS?
Windows 16 Bit?
Hey folks,
With Ben Laurie's help, I recently contributed ssl/heartbeat_test.c,
which is a unit test that acts as a regression test against the
Heartbleed bug. I'd like to contribute more to the project in the
coming months in terms of helping grow a robust suite of
unit/integration/automated
On 2 June 2014 15:38, Mike Bland mbl...@acm.org wrote:
My goal would be to help everyone learn to fish, to use the tired
cliché. I currently have very little knowledge of the OpenSSL code
base or community, and I don't have a ton of time to do all the heavy
lifting by myself; nor do I think
Hi Mike,
I would like to volunteer for the same. I can spare some time on the weekends
for it. Please do note that even I am new to openssl and it would be good to
get to know more on the code by doing unit test.
Thanks
Darshan
-Original Message-
From: owner-openssl-...@openssl.org
On Mon, Jun 02, 2014 at 03:38:22PM +0200, stefan.n...@t-online.de wrote:
* How much do you gain by removing support for the platform?
Is there any relevant amount of code, that is really NT/2000/XP specific
and unneeded for newer Windows releases? Breaking the support for
the ancient
This pull request appears to be closed. Is this ticket still valid?
Matt
__
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
Development Mailing List openssl-dev@openssl.org
Automated
Am 02.06.2014 17:42, schrieb Theodore Ts'o:
On Mon, Jun 02, 2014 at 03:38:22PM +0200, stefan.n...@t-online.de wrote:
* How much do you gain by removing support for the platform?
Is there any relevant amount of code, that is really NT/2000/XP specific
and unneeded for newer Windows releases?
The other thing to consider is that perhaps OpenBSD really has the
right approach, which is that portability should be done via support
libraries, and not part of the core code. That might impact
performance on some legacy piece of cr*p, but presumably, impacted
performance is better than no
On Tue, Jun 03, 2014 at 11:22:58AM +1000, Peter Waltenberg wrote:
I won't argue that sometimes legacy support makes the code hard to read,
but in itself I don't think it's causing bugs.
The OpenBSD people are right here. If it's hard to read, then we
don't have many eyeballs on the code.
(c) EBCDIC.
z/OS is still alive. I'll concede that one is weird and hard to get hold
of, but it has a lot of users still.
This ISN'T the Linux kernel. It's userspace code and longer lived and wider
spread than Linux and pretty fundamental to security.
Even with the 'dead' platforms crossed out,
On Tue, Jun 03, 2014 at 12:20:17PM +1000, Peter Waltenberg wrote:
(c) EBCDIC.
z/OS is still alive. I'll concede that one is weird and hard to get hold
of, but it has a lot of users still.
z/OS supports ASCII, and UTF-8, and has its own conversion routines
built into the system. So it's not
Please review the proposed patch for /openssl-1.0.1g/crypto/opensslv.h
meant to correct a typo in the SHLIB_VERSION_NUMBER at the end of this
message.
Recently I compiled OpenSSL 1.0.1g and found that it numbers the
version shown in the filename of the .dylib made with the -shared
configuration
I just clone the last release 1.0.1g and the file file ms\version32.rc still
mentions:
Copyright C 1998-2005 The OpenSSL Project. Copyright C 1995-1998 Eric A.
Young, Tim J. Hudson. All rights reserved.
shouldn't this sentence been updated ?
Arnaud
On Tue, Jun 03, 2014 at 04:59:58AM +0200, Lubo Diakov via RT wrote:
Please review the proposed patch for /openssl-1.0.1g/crypto/opensslv.h
meant to correct a typo in the SHLIB_VERSION_NUMBER at the end of this
message.
Recently I compiled OpenSSL 1.0.1g and found that it numbers the
Look at the sources.
The build related mess is mainly Windows support.
#ifdef hell is mainly around external engine support, asm to get
performance, or object sizes/endianess which intrinsically varies platform
to platform. The code was written over a lot of years with a lot of
different styles
25 matches
Mail list logo
