-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Zhao, Wenzhong, Dr
{Zhao}(GSFC-613.2)[SSAI]
Sent: Monday, March 03, 2008 7:52 PM
To: openssl-dev@openssl.org
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Install openssl-0.9.8g on a Mac OS X PPC server
Hi,
Hi All,
I have a Solaris 2.5.1 system with all current patches.
I built OpenSSL 0.9.8i with the command:
./config shared -L/usr/local/lib
then
edited Makefile and add -R/usr/local/lib:/usr/local/ssl/lib to CFLAG line
then
make
The build completes without errors.
make test
I get the
This is from /openssl-SNAP-20090405 on Solaris x86 ver 2.5.1 using
gcc 2.95.3:
gcc -I.. -I../.. -I../asn1 -I../evp -I../../include -fPIC -DOPENSSL_PIC
-DOPENSSL_THREADS -D_REENTRANT -DDSO_DLFCN -DHAVE_DLFCN_H -O3
-fomit-frame-pointer -march=pentium -Wall -DL_ENDIAN
-DOPENSSL_NO_INLINE_ASM
Thor Lancelot Simon wrote:
On Sun, Apr 05, 2009 at 09:40:36PM -0700, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
This is from /openssl-SNAP-20090405 on Solaris x86 ver 2.5.1 using
gcc 2.95.3:
Ow! Solaris 2.5.1, and gcc2?
Didn't Sun even finally end all support for Solaris 2.5?
There are trivial differences
Andy Polyakov wrote:
There are trivial differences between Solaris 2.5.1 and the later
Solaris versions. Not enough to cause a build problem. So if
it's busted on 2.5.1 it will be busted on 2.6, 2.7 etc.
Newer Solaris version *are* equipped with newer assembler, which *does*
support
Andy Polyakov wrote:
There are trivial differences between Solaris 2.5.1 and the later
Solaris versions. Not enough to cause a build problem. So if
it's busted on 2.5.1 it will be busted on 2.6, 2.7 etc.
Newer Solaris version *are* equipped with newer assembler, which *does*
support more x86
Ger Hobbelt via RT wrote:
Simple stuff, but best to get this out of the way finally.
Patch file included, of course.
Here is a patch to your patch:
+* any floating point printf's.
+will automatically add new session-id's to the cache upon successful
are supposed to be:
+
Steven M. Schweda wrote:
From: Ger Hobbelt g...@hobbelt.com
On Thu, Apr 9, 2009 at 6:42 PM, Ted Mittelstaedt t...@toybox.placo.com wrote:
Here is a patch to your patch:
[...]
plural, not possessive.
Thanks for the correction. It's appreciated!
Hey
Hi All,
I have a Solaris 2.5.1 x86 system and openssl 0.9.7e and I
want to build it with shared libraries, so I tried the following
with the openssl-0.9.7-stable-SNAP-20050109:
./Configure solaris-x86-gcc zlib shared no-asm
and part way into the compilation it aborts with the following:
+
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Andy Polyakov
Sent: Tuesday, January 11, 2005 2:57 AM
To: openssl-dev@openssl.org
Subject: Re: Having problems building shared libraries under Solaris
2.5.1
I have a Solaris 2.5.1 x86 system and
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Gert Doering via RT
Sent: Thursday, January 13, 2005 12:50 AM
Cc: openssl-dev@openssl.org
Subject: Re: [openssl.org #1000] OpenSSL 0.9.7e fails RIPEMD160 on
Sparc64
Hi,
On Thu, Jan 13, 2005 at
before building openssl.
Solaris 2.6 and later have the crle command that fixes
this.
Ted
-Original Message-
From: Ted Mittelstaedt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, January 11, 2005 12:21 PM
To: openssl-dev@openssl.org
Subject: RE: Having problems building shared libraries
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Vladas Shukevichus
via RT
Sent: Tuesday, January 18, 2005 12:34 AM
Cc: openssl-dev@openssl.org
Subject: [openssl.org #1003] Request: entropy gathering
It's kind of strange, each time php script
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Andy Polyakov
Sent: Saturday, January 29, 2005 9:23 AM
To: openssl-dev@openssl.org
Subject: Re: Openssl-SNAP-20050129 Re: Openssl-SNAP-20050125 Re:
Openssl-SNAP-20050124
... ./sha512t
Illegal
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello
As part of a project I am compiling OpenSSL on multiple different Unix
flavours and have had many different problems when trying to
get OpenSSL
to compile.
Hi Peter,
Let be give you just a bit of advice. OpenSSL is extremely sensitive
to half-assed gcc
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Brian Candler
Sent: Thursday, February 03, 2005 11:42 AM
To: openssl-dev@openssl.org
Subject: Re: 0.9.7e with ./config shared won't build under
FreeBSD 5.3
On Thu, Feb 03, 2005 at 03:17:49PM
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Andy Polyakov
Sent: Friday, February 04, 2005 2:37 AM
To: openssl-dev@openssl.org
Subject: Re: Minimum compiler support on different unix flavours?
As part of a project I am compiling OpenSSL on
Hi Edward,
If you type which make at the command line does the system find it?
Usually in Solaris to build software you need the development tools,
which AREN'T installed by default, and you need a C compiler (generally
people use binaries of gcc that they download or purchase the Sun
compiler)
Rob,
Where is O_NOFOLLOW used in OpenSSL version 0.9.7e?
Ted
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Robert Banz via RT
Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 12:44 AM
Cc: openssl-dev@openssl.org
Subject: [openssl.org #1015] don't use O_NOFOLLOW on
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Tim Rice
Sent: Monday, May 30, 2005 10:19 PM
To: openssl-dev@openssl.org
Subject: When do we stop supporting old platforms?
I notice my OpenServer 3 box will not compile the 0.9.8 betas.
...
[EMAIL
# uname -a
SunOS mail2 5.5.1 Generic_103641-42 i86pc i386 i86pc
# gcc -v
Reading specs from
/usr/local/lib/gcc-lib/i586-sun-solaris2.5.1/2.95.3/specs
gcc version 2.95.3 20010315 (release)
#
Hardware is a Pentium 66. (yes, an original Pentium)
# ./Configure solaris-x86-gcc zlib shared
OK it's still got a problem:
# ./config
Operating system: i86pc-whatever-solaris2
Configuring for solaris-x86-gcc
Configuring for solaris-x86-gcc
no-gmp [default] OPENSSL_NO_GMP (skip dir)
no-krb5 [krb5-flavor not specified] OPENSSL_NO_KRB5
no-mdc2 [default]
Thanks, Andy! It builds now. And make test completes without errors.
I have another question on this build, config puts in
-march=i486
but, shouldn't we be using
-march=pentium
The reason I ask is I see a lot of files that appear to be
specific for the Pentium or later CPU - will these
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Andy Polyakov
Sent: Sunday, June 26, 2005 9:35 AM
To: openssl-dev@openssl.org
Cc: openssl-users@openssl.org
Subject: Re: Compilation of openssl-0.9.8-stable-SNAP-20050624 fails on
Solaris 2.5.1 x86
I have
Hi All,
I just checked this against my own FreeBSD 4.8 system and got the exact
same segfault. This was with SNAP-20050704 I'll try FreeBSD 4.11 next.
Ted
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Dmitry Belyavsky via
RT
Sent: Monday, July 04,
Use ./config not ./Configure or put in the no-sse2 option yourself.
Ted
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of sharma via RT
Sent: Friday, August 19, 2005 7:31 AM
Cc: openssl-dev@openssl.org
Subject: [openssl.org #1190] bug report
Hi
I am
Hi All,
OpenSSL builds but fails tests. Here's the particulars:
Freshly installed and patched Solaris 8 x86 system
# gcc -v
Reading specs from /usr/local/lib/gcc/i386-pc-solaris2.8/3.4.2/specs
Configured with:
../configure --with-as=/usr/ccs/bin/as --with-ld=/usr/ccs/bin/ld --disabl
e-nls
PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Geoff Thorpe
Sent: Tuesday, October 04, 2005 9:17 AM
To: openssl-users@openssl.org
Subject: Re: Problem with OpenSSL on Solaris x86 *
On October 4, 2005 08:00 am, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
OpenSSL builds but fails tests. Here's the particulars:
[snip
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Richard Levitte - VMS
Whacker via RT
Sent: Monday, October 17, 2005 5:14 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: openssl-dev@openssl.org
Subject: Re: [openssl.org #1222] Please introduce versioned symbols
[Additional
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Andy Polyakov
Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2005 5:23 AM
To: openssl-dev@openssl.org
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [openssl.org #1223] make test fails on some systems in
0.9.8a
Give it up, the developers
Sam,
What happens when you put the directive no-asm for config?
Ted
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of sharma via RT
Sent: Tuesday, November 01, 2005 11:31 AM
Cc: openssl-dev@openssl.org
Subject: RE: [openssl.org #1190] bug report
Hi
The
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Brian Long
Sent: Tuesday, January 31, 2006 5:58 AM
To: openssl-dev@openssl.org
Subject: Re: [openssl.org #1276] [PATCH] TLS Extensions - RFC 3546 (Try
2)
On Fri, 2006-01-27 at 15:23 +0100, Stephen Henson via
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Kurt Roeckx
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2006 1:15 PM
To: openssl-dev@openssl.org
Subject: [PATCH] Remove old libdes support?
Hi,
Various places in the source say that old des support is going to
be removed
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Howard Chu
Sent: Tuesday, May 16, 2006 4:58 PM
To: openssl-dev@openssl.org
Cc: Bob Beck
Subject: Re: Any possibility of GPL-based license in the future?
Sometimes the fact that the main source moves onward
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Jeffrey Altman
Sent: Tuesday, May 16, 2006 2:03 PM
To: openssl-dev@openssl.org
Cc: Bob Beck; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Any possibility of GPL-based license in the future?
It is impossible for OpenSSL to
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Scott Kelly
Sent: Monday, June 19, 2006 10:26 AM
To: openssl-dev@openssl.org
Subject: rfc 4279 support - what's the plan?
Last August some folks from Nokia posted a patch for 0.9.8a that
implements a portion
36 matches
Mail list logo
