On 2021/07/24 21:32, Theo Buehler wrote: > On Sat, Jul 24, 2021 at 09:00:47PM +0200, Theo Buehler wrote: > > On Sat, Jul 24, 2021 at 07:26:53PM +0100, Stuart Henderson wrote: > > > any salt users around who can test this? > > > > The regress/lib/libssl/tlsfuzzer tests exercise M2Crypto quite well. > > They pass. > > > > ok tb > > > > with one comment below. > > > > > Index: patches/patch-src_SWIG__bio_i > > > =================================================================== > > > RCS file: patches/patch-src_SWIG__bio_i > > > diff -N patches/patch-src_SWIG__bio_i > > > --- /dev/null 1 Jan 1970 00:00:00 -0000 > > > +++ patches/patch-src_SWIG__bio_i 24 Jul 2021 18:25:28 -0000 > > > @@ -0,0 +1,34 @@ > > > +$OpenBSD: patch-SWIG__bio_i,v 1.4 2018/04/25 16:51:05 jasper Exp $ > > > + > > > +BIO_meth_new() and BIO_meth_free() are non-static in LibreSSL > > > > The patch description makes no sense to me. > > > > Presumably the patch itself is a leftover from before we had BIO_meth > > stuff. I think it should be dropped: we should be using libcrypto's > > version, not a reimplementation. > > Grmbl. I failed to actually remove the patch in my first test... > > src/SWIG/_m2crypto_wrap.c:5527:32: warning: implicit declaration of > function 'BIO_get_init' is invalid in C99 > [-Wimplicit-function-declaration] > if (BIO_get_shutdown(b) && BIO_get_init(b)) > ^ > > BIO_get_init() is missing from libcrypto. That's a clear oversight. I > will add this in the next bump. > > I suggest using this diff. It only adds a BIO_get_init() define instead > of re-doing all manner of BIO_ things. Only > patches/patch-src_SWIG__bio_i changed.
Oh nice, thanks! Thanks for the tip about regress/lib/libssl/tlsfuzzer, noted. Given that testing, I'm going to commit it - if somebody runs into a problem with salt please let me know but it seems unlikely.
