31.01.2017, 10:21, "Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos": > On Fri, 2017-01-27 at 10:54 -0600, Benjamin Kaduk via openssl-dev > wrote: >> [moving from github to -dev] >> >> On 01/27/2017 07:36 AM, mattcaswell wrote: >> > 1.0.2 is the software version. >> > The numbers on the end of lbssl.so.1.0.0 refer to the ABI version - >> > which is different. Software version 1.0.2 is a drop in replacement >> > for 1.0.1, which is a drop in replacement for 1.0.0 - hence they >> > all have the same ABI version. >> > >> >> There was some discussion about 1.0.1 being EoL on a FreeBSD list >> , and whether it would make sense to move to 1.0.2 on their stable >> branch, which led to someone making the claim that 1.0.2 has removed >> 4 symbols compared to 1.0.1, and thus is not strictly ABI compatible, >> linking to https://abi-laboratory.pro/tracker/timeline/openssl/ . If >> I start semi-randomly clicking around, I can find a page  that >> seems to claim the missing symbols are: >> ASN1_STRING_clear_free() >> ENGINE_load_rsax() >> SRP_user_pwd_free() >> SRP_VBASE_get1_by_user() > > ... >> One (naive?) idea for a home-grown solution would be to come up with >> a scheme to serialize the public ABI to a file in the repo, maybe >> regenerated as part of 'make test', and ensure that that file is >> append-only, at least between releases. But I don't know if the >> state of the art is more advanced than that -- are there better >> options? > > The abi-dumper and abi-compliance-checker tools can be used for that > purpose. In fact they are the back-end tools used by the abi-laboratory > you quote above.
Hello, These pages on OpenSSL wiki may be helpful: https://wiki.openssl.org/index.php/Binary_Compatibility https://wiki.openssl.org/index.php/ABI_Tracker Thank you. -- openssl-dev mailing list To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-dev