Does this patch break compatibility with nettle < 3.4?

The solution offered here seems to be better:
https://github.com/themiron/dnsmasq/commit/6fd9aba7abe1e084123bc5002959350897774ace

Best,
Dominik

On Sat, 2019-08-10 at 13:30 +0200, Hans Dedecker wrote:
> Nettle 3.5.1 has made ecc_curve definitions (nettle_secp_192r1,
> nettle_secp_224r1, nettle_secp_256r1, ...) private and forces
> users to make use of the accessor functions (nettle_get_secp_192r1,
> ...) to retrieve the specific ecc_curve structs.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Hans Dedecker <dedec...@gmail.com>
> ---
>  src/crypto.c | 4 ++--
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/src/crypto.c b/src/crypto.c
> index ebb871e..dacecb6 100644
> --- a/src/crypto.c
> +++ b/src/crypto.c
> @@ -294,7 +294,7 @@ static int dnsmasq_ecdsa_verify(struct blockdata
> *key_data, unsigned int key_len
>         if (!(key_256 = whine_malloc(sizeof(struct ecc_point))))
>           return 0;
>         
> -       nettle_ecc_point_init(key_256, &nettle_secp_256r1);
> +       nettle_ecc_point_init(key_256, nettle_get_secp_256r1());
>       }
>        
>        key = key_256;
> @@ -307,7 +307,7 @@ static int dnsmasq_ecdsa_verify(struct blockdata
> *key_data, unsigned int key_len
>         if (!(key_384 = whine_malloc(sizeof(struct ecc_point))))
>           return 0;
>         
> -       nettle_ecc_point_init(key_384, &nettle_secp_384r1);
> +       nettle_ecc_point_init(key_384, nettle_get_secp_384r1());
>       }
>        
>        key = key_384;


_______________________________________________
Dnsmasq-discuss mailing list
Dnsmasq-discuss@lists.thekelleys.org.uk
http://lists.thekelleys.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/dnsmasq-discuss

Reply via email to