Wan-Teh Chang wrote:

> Steven T. Hatton wrote:
> 
>> when I try to run the SSLClient.class found in the sample code found 
>> on mozilla.org I get:
[snip]

 
> You are missing two .so's for 32-bit Solaris SPARC.
> 
> libfreebl_pure32_3.so
> libfreebl_hybrid_3.so
> 
> These need to be installed in the same directory as
> libnss3.so on 32-bit Solaris SPARC.
> 
> See "Support for ILP32" in
> http://www.mozilla.org/projects/security/pki/nss/intro.html


That section is a bit unclear, IMHO.  I'm not sure why you didn't simply 
tarball those with the 64-bit bundle.  It might be helpful to explain 
that a person needs to fetch those files from the 32-bit builds.


> and "Migration from NSS 3.1.1" in the NSS 3.2 Release Notes
> http://www.mozilla.org/projects/security/pki/nss/release_notes_32.html.
> 
> By the way, you also need to install the libnssckbi.so in
> 
> your NSS config directory (where your cert7.db, key3.db,
> and secmod.db are).


That's strange.  Putting them elsewhere in the LD_LIBRARY_PATH won't 
work?  Is that by intentional design, or just a 'feature' of this 
current version?  It seems rather prone to cause problems when people 
try to install the NSS. Or when they add new databases.  I hope a 
symlink will work.  I wonder if there is a way to get the certutil to 
spit it out wtih the -N if it just *has* to be in the same directory as 
the db files.

 
> 
>> I attempted to use the command line tools provided with the NSS-3.3.1, 
>> but they do not function as described in the documentation.  They 
>> don't even seem to be close to what is described in the documentation.
> 
> 
> 
> This would be a serious problem.  Please help us find out if our
> documentation is incorrect or there is some problem in your setup.


I need to go back and check to make sure I have all the latest documentation 

before I comment too much.  It may all have to do with the problem I was having 

with the certutil -K (described in another post). 



>> I'm srue this is a wonderful suite of tools, but without better 
>> documentation, it is unusable.
> 
> 
> 
> This is true.  We don't have a technical writer now, so we can
> only do spot fixes or improvements as opposed to adding major
> new docs. 


I know the feeling.  The only thing I hate more than not having good 
documentation is writing it.  {;-)>

> If you find any problem in our documentation, please
> let us know and we will fix it.


Will do.


> Thanks,
> Wan-Teh
> 

And than *you* for making this wonderful technology available to all of us.

Steven


Reply via email to