Ping. Any comments here? Thanks!
On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 10:19:51PM -0500, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote: > Khem, Richard, > > Sorry for belated reply. I haven't had time for master yet, but since this > just got backported to thud, I'm seeing a similar breakage. > > First of all, BN_LLONG not being defined does seem to be "fixed" by this > patch, but I'm not entirely sure why it now checks for OPENSSL_SYS_UEFI - > this > seems to be a new define in OpenSSL 1.1, and doesn't even exist in OpenSSL 1.0 > Is it a pure luck that it works now? Any hidden meaning I missded? > > And it also breaks exactly the same for DES_LONG due to a similar construct: > > > #if (defined(HEADER_NEW_DES_H) || defined(HEADER_DES_H)) && !defined(DES_LONG) > /* If this is set to 'unsigned int' on a DEC Alpha, this gives about a > * %20 speed up (longs are 8 bytes, int's are 4). */ > #ifndef DES_LONG > #define DES_LONG unsigned int > #endif > #endif > > > I was going to fix it similarly as BN_LLONG, but since I don't understand how > it was supposed to be fixed, I'm not sure how to fix DES_LONG not being > defined. Any ideas? > > Thanks. > > -- > Denys > > > On Wed, Feb 06, 2019 at 10:25:26PM -0800, Khem Raj wrote: > > After adding #pragma once to wrapper header ( opensslconf.h ) this > > latent issue got to bite us, where it expect bn.h to be including > > openssl.h to define BN_* defines, which is fragile. This patch removes > > the contraints for nested includes for bn.h > > > > Signed-off-by: Khem Raj <raj.k...@gmail.com> > > --- > > .../0001-Fix-BN_LLONG-breakage.patch | 33 +++++++++++++++++++ > > .../openssl/openssl10_1.0.2q.bb | 1 + > > 2 files changed, 34 insertions(+) > > create mode 100644 > > meta/recipes-connectivity/openssl/openssl10/0001-Fix-BN_LLONG-breakage.patch > > > > diff --git > > a/meta/recipes-connectivity/openssl/openssl10/0001-Fix-BN_LLONG-breakage.patch > > > > b/meta/recipes-connectivity/openssl/openssl10/0001-Fix-BN_LLONG-breakage.patch > > new file mode 100644 > > index 0000000000..13d39c918c > > --- /dev/null > > +++ > > b/meta/recipes-connectivity/openssl/openssl10/0001-Fix-BN_LLONG-breakage.patch > > @@ -0,0 +1,33 @@ > > +From 247b3188cde5f3347091cd54271127386d3aece0 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > > +From: Khem Raj <raj.k...@gmail.com> > > +Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2019 22:10:33 -0800 > > +Subject: [PATCH] Fix BN_LLONG breakage > > + > > +opensslconf.h is un-defining BN_LLONG only when included from bn.h which > > +is not robust at all, especially when include guards are used and > > +multiple inclusions of a given header is not allowed. so lets take out > > +the nesting constraint and add OPENSSL_SYS_UEFI constraint instead > > + > > +Upstream-Status: Inappropriate [ fixed differently with OpenSSL 1.1+ ] > > + > > +Signed-off-by: Khem Raj <raj.k...@gmail.com> > > +--- > > + crypto/opensslconf.h.in | 2 +- > > + 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > + > > +diff --git a/crypto/opensslconf.h.in b/crypto/opensslconf.h.in > > +index 7a1c85d..a10c10f 100644 > > +--- a/crypto/opensslconf.h.in > > ++++ b/crypto/opensslconf.h.in > > +@@ -56,7 +56,7 @@ > > + #endif > > + #endif > > + > > +-#if defined(HEADER_BN_H) && !defined(CONFIG_HEADER_BN_H) > > ++#if !defined(OPENSSL_SYS_UEFI) && !defined(CONFIG_HEADER_BN_H) > > + #define CONFIG_HEADER_BN_H > > + #undef BN_LLONG > > + > > +-- > > +2.20.1 > > + > > diff --git a/meta/recipes-connectivity/openssl/openssl10_1.0.2q.bb > > b/meta/recipes-connectivity/openssl/openssl10_1.0.2q.bb > > index 809634f6c0..88aefdea4f 100644 > > --- a/meta/recipes-connectivity/openssl/openssl10_1.0.2q.bb > > +++ b/meta/recipes-connectivity/openssl/openssl10_1.0.2q.bb > > @@ -40,6 +40,7 @@ SRC_URI = > > "http://www.openssl.org/source/openssl-${PV}.tar.gz \ > > file://0001-Fix-build-with-clang-using-external-assembler.patch > > \ > > file://0001-openssl-force-soft-link-to-avoid-rare-race.patch \ > > file://0001-allow-manpages-to-be-disabled.patch \ > > + file://0001-Fix-BN_LLONG-breakage.patch \ > > " > > > > SRC_URI_append_class-target = " \ > > -- > > 2.20.1 > > > > -- > > _______________________________________________ > > Openembedded-core mailing list > > Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org > > http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core > -- > _______________________________________________ > Openembedded-core mailing list > Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org > http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core -- _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core