Greetings!

On Fri, 28 Oct 2005, Andy Polyakov via RT wrote:

>
> > I've got a segmentation fault in openssl-0.9.8a.
> > ../util/shlib_wrap.sh ./sha512t
> > make[2]: *** [test_sha] Illegal instruction
>
> It's not considered to be bug, but a feature. As documented in FAQ.

I'm sorry. It's my fault.

> > Adding no-sse2 to config options fixes this problem.
>
> Well, sometimes you have to be more specific and explicitly express
> opinion. One can discuss that automatic detection when no-sse2 is due
> [either at config or run-time] can be improved. In which case it's more
> appropriate to turn to <openssl-dev>, make suggestion, collect opinions
> and reach consensus. Or one can discuss that whole SSE2 support should
> be treated as bug, in which case it's [again] more appropaite to turn to
> openssl-dev to explicitly state something like "it appears to me that
> these sse2 code-pathes create more trouble on elder systems than good on
> new ones and in my opinion it should be disabled everywhere." So I'm
> dismissing the case with "not treated as bug, not for the moment of this
> writing" and see you at <openssl-dev>. A.

It seems to me that it would be better to improve automatic detection
(for example, using /proc/cpuinfo when it exists), but I agree it's not
very important.

Thank you!

-- 
SY, Dmitry Belyavsky (ICQ UIN 11116575)

______________________________________________________________________
OpenSSL Project                                 http://www.openssl.org
Development Mailing List                       [email protected]
Automated List Manager                           [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to