That's pretty much what I asked from the beginning, the possibility to use
ERR_set_implementation and to have ERR_FNS public. But because of ("if
(!err_fns)") on ERR_set_implementation:304, that's just not possible.I just asked that for the next stable release :) NewPKI is only compatible with openssl > 0.9.7b, so I guess it could become only compatible with openssl > 0.9.8 (or wathever next release is). Thanks. Frédéric Giudicelli http://www.newpki.org > > OK, what stops you from creating your own implementation table and > fill that with whatever you want, and give that as an argument to > ERR_set_implementation(). I know, it means you have to look in > crypto/err/err.c for each version to see if there's been a change to > ERR_FNS. Guess what? It sounds like you must fiddle with that file > eaither way... > > -- > Richard Levitte \ Tunnlandsvägen 3 \ [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [EMAIL PROTECTED] \ S-168 36 BROMMA \ T: +46-8-26 52 47 > \ SWEDEN \ or +46-708-26 53 44 > Procurator Odiosus Ex Infernis -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Member of the OpenSSL development team: http://www.openssl.org/ > > Unsolicited commercial email is subject to an archival fee of $400. > See <http://www.stacken.kth.se/~levitte/mail/> for more info. > > In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Fri, 4 Jul 2003 > 20:02:15 +0200 (METDST), "Frédéric Giudicelli via RT" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > said: > > rt> Because, I could "stub" the default implementation, and if the error > rt> handling has been disabled, then I just don't call the default > rt> implementation function. > rt> > rt> Frédéric Giudicelli > rt> http://www.newpki.org > rt> > rt> > rt> ----- Original Message ----- > rt> From: "Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > rt> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > rt> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > rt> Sent: Friday, July 04, 2003 1:52 PM > rt> Subject: Re: [openssl.org #629] Custom error handling > rt> > rt> > rt> > In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Fri, 4 Jul > 2003 > rt> 00:12:24 +0200, Frédéric Giudicelli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > rt> > > rt> > groups> The problem is the following, yes your code > rt> (ERR_pop_to_mark/ERR_set_mark) > rt> > groups> is fine when a child function is adding a new error, > however, what > rt> happends > rt> > groups> when it calls ERR_clear_error ? In my implementation I need > the > rt> error stack > rt> > groups> to be preserved even if a child function calls > ERR_clear_error. > rt> > groups> > rt> > groups> That's why if you happended to remove the "if (!err_fns)" > test in > rt> > groups> ERR_set_implementation, I would be more than happy. > rt> > > rt> > I'm sorry, but in what way does that prevent the error stack to be > rt> > cleared? Maybe a better thing would be to have a flag that inhibits > rt> > clearing the error stack... I'll ponder over this issue. > rt> > > rt> > -- > rt> > Richard Levitte \ Tunnlandsvägen 3 \ [EMAIL PROTECTED] > rt> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] \ S-168 36 BROMMA \ T: +46-8-26 52 47 > rt> > \ SWEDEN \ or +46-708-26 53 44 > rt> > Procurator Odiosus Ex Infernis -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] > rt> > Member of the OpenSSL development team: http://www.openssl.org/ > rt> > > rt> > Unsolicited commercial email is subject to an archival fee of $400. > rt> > See <http://www.stacken.kth.se/~levitte/mail/> for more info. > rt> > > ______________________________________________________________________ > rt> > OpenSSL Project > http://www.openssl.org > rt> > Development Mailing List > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > rt> > Automated List Manager > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > rt> > > rt> > rt> ______________________________________________________________________ > rt> OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org > rt> Development Mailing List [EMAIL PROTECTED] > rt> Automated List Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > ______________________________________________________________________ OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org Development Mailing List [EMAIL PROTECTED] Automated List Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED]
