From: Admin Mailing Lists [EMAIL PROTECTED]
mlist no, there's no version rule per say. but AFAIA the vast
mlist majority of the online society has adopted that a is alpha, b
mlist is beta, and g is gamma, all meaning a pre-release to the
mlist version number stated.
And what does 'c' mean then?
Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker wrote:
mlist it's true you're welcome to do versioning anyway you want..but
mlist noone i know has ever taken 'a' as a newer release on the same
mlist version.
Now you know one: me. :-)
And I can give you another one: RMS (emacs 19.34 was followed by
19.34a
From: Jean-Marc Desperrier [EMAIL PROTECTED]
jean-marc.desperrier Usually subversion with a a, b, c index are very
jean-marc.desperrier minor version with very little change, and it's
jean-marc.desperrier unusual to have a beta release for such a minor
jean-marc.desperrier release.
I do agree
From: Admin Mailing Lists [EMAIL PROTECTED]
mlist uhh, the 'a' on the version can be very deceiving.
mlist it denotes an alpha version of the version number stated.
I'm sorry, it does not. There are no such rules, except some people
may do so (I have never before seen that definition). OUR
On Mon, 2 Apr 2001, Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker wrote:
From: Admin Mailing Lists [EMAIL PROTECTED]
mlist uhh, the 'a' on the version can be very deceiving.
mlist it denotes an alpha version of the version number stated.
I'm sorry, it does not. There are no such rules, except some
Richard Levitte wrote:
The third beta release of OpenSSL 0.9.6a is now available from the
OpenSSL FTP site URL: ftp://ftp.openssl.org/source/.
Passes all tests on Alpha, RedHat Linux 6.2. Great job, guys!
Paul Allen
--
Boeing Phantom Works \ Paul L. Allen, (425) 865-3297
I built and tested openssl-0.9.6a-beta3 on Cygwin and DJGPP, under
Windows98 and MS-DOS respectively. Since I am in the US, I built
without idea or rc5. Both make and "make test" work without major
problems, after the attached patch is applied. The DJGPP "make test"
complains about "unable to
On Fri, Mar 30, 2001 at 10:45:06PM +0200, Richard Levitte wrote:
openssl-0.9.6a-beta3.tar.gz
openssl-engine-0.9.6a-beta3.tar.gz
The next (hopefully real) release is scheduled for Tuesday 2001-04-03. To make
sure that it will work correctly, please test this version (especially on
From: lgazis [EMAIL PROTECTED]
lgazis Tests of OpenSSL 0.9.6a Beta 3, engine version in all cases, in all cases
lgazis did make, ran openssl speed test to make sure engine loaded properly, and
lgazis ran make test:
lgazis
lgazis HP-UX 11.0 32-bit (hpux-parisc-gcc): Passed if libswift.sl was
The next (hopefully real) release is scheduled for Tuesday
2001-04-03. To make
sure that it will work correctly, please test this version
(especially on less
common platforms), and report any problems to [EMAIL PROTECTED].
Looks good from here on my IRIX systems.
Thanks,
-Dave
Tests of OpenSSL 0.9.6a Beta 3, engine version in all cases, in all cases
did make, ran openssl speed test to make sure engine loaded properly, and
ran make test:
HP-UX 11.0 32-bit (hpux-parisc-gcc): Passed if libswift.sl was copied to
apps directory.
AIX 4.3 (aix43-gcc): Passed if libswift.a
11 matches
Mail list logo
