On 30-05-17 17:25, Salz, Rich via openssl-users wrote:
>> The results are both functional, but the v102l build is missing
>> sha{224|256|384|512} digests
>
> Right; those digests are not in 1.0.2
They are, they're just not advertised:
$ openssl version
OpenSSL 1.0.2k 26 Jan 2017
$ openssl
On 5/30/17 9:01 AM, Jakob Bohm wrote:
Actually, in my testing of earlier 1.0.x releases, sha256 etc. are
only missing from the help message, they are actually there, also as
commands.
On 5/30/17 9:14 AM, Salz, Rich wrote:
>> Then I've misunderstood the presence of the "-DSHA256_ASM" flag.
>>
> Then I've misunderstood the presence of the "-DSHA256_ASM" flag.
>
> What's it specifically used for?
To remind me to double-check my answers? :(
Sorry, they are present. The difference is that the help message in 1.0.2
isn't complete. Did you try the commands directly?
--
openssl-users
On 30/05/2017 17:20, PGNet Dev wrote:
I'm building separate local instances of latest Openssl v1.1.0 & v1.0.2 on
linux64, to keep not-yet-v110-compliant apps happy.
The results are both functional, but the v102l build is missing
sha{224|256|384|512} digests
v 1.0.2l
On 5/30/17 8:25 AM, Salz, Rich wrote:
The results are both functional, but the v102l build is missing
sha{224|256|384|512} digests
Right; those digests are not in 1.0.2
Then I've misunderstood the presence of the "-DSHA256_ASM" flag.
What's it specifically used for?
--
openssl-users
> The results are both functional, but the v102l build is missing
> sha{224|256|384|512} digests
Right; those digests are not in 1.0.2
--
openssl-users mailing list
To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-users
I'm building separate local instances of latest Openssl v1.1.0 & v1.0.2 on
linux64, to keep not-yet-v110-compliant apps happy.
The results are both functional, but the v102l build is missing
sha{224|256|384|512} digests
v 1.0.2l
/usr/local/openssl10/bin/openssl version
