[Bug 68155] New: Sobha Neopolis Panathur - 3 & 4 BHK Luxury Apartments
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68155 Bug ID: 68155 Summary: Sobha Neopolis Panathur - 3 & 4 BHK Luxury Apartments Product: Apache httpd-test Version: unspecified Hardware: PC Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: framework Assignee: bugs@httpd.apache.org Reporter: upcomingprojects.b...@gmail.com Target Milestone: --- Sobha Neopolis is an upcoming ultra-luxury residential development by Sobha Limited, promising a sophisticated and lavish living experience. Positioned as a pre-launch project, Sobha Neopolis is anticipated to redefine the standards of opulence in residential living. Sobha Limited, a renowned real estate developer, is known for its commitment to quality and attention to detail in every project. Sobha Neopolis is expected to reflect these principles, offering a blend of modern architecture, top-notch amenities, and a prime location to create a truly exceptional living space. https://www.sobhaneopolis.org.in https://faithlife.com/posts/5585413 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: bugs-unsubscr...@httpd.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: bugs-h...@httpd.apache.org
[Bug 68080] OPENSSL_NO_ENGINE from openssl/opensslconf.h ignored
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68080 --- Comment #8 from Yann Ylavic --- > There is https://github.com/apache/httpd/pull/381 which is a backport I plan > to propose for the next release. r1913815 is now included in this PR, so the full patch would be: https://patch-diff.githubusercontent.com/raw/apache/httpd/pull/381.diff -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: bugs-unsubscr...@httpd.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: bugs-h...@httpd.apache.org
[Bug 68080] OPENSSL_NO_ENGINE from openssl/opensslconf.h ignored
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68080 Yann Ylavic changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||FixedInTrunk --- Comment #7 from Yann Ylavic --- (In reply to Joe Orton from comment #4) > Created attachment 39370 [details] > allow SSLCryptoDevice builtin to be configured w/o any ENGINE support in > openSSL Thanks Joe, I pushed the whole in r1913815. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: bugs-unsubscr...@httpd.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: bugs-h...@httpd.apache.org
[Bug 68080] OPENSSL_NO_ENGINE from openssl/opensslconf.h ignored
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68080 --- Comment #6 from Yann Ylavic --- (In reply to Bernard Spil from comment #5) > (In reply to Yann Ylavic from comment #2) > > Created attachment 39349 [details] > > Unset MODSSL_HAVE_ENGINE_API for OPENSSL_NO_ENGINE > > > > I'm wondering if we still want to allow for "SSLCryptoDevice builtin" when > > OPENSSL_NO_ENGINE is set. I don't know how much this setting is used nor if > > we should care, but given that "builtin" is the same as no SSLCryptoDevice > > maybe we could still let httpd start even if it's built against openssl >= 3 > > or OPENSSL_NO_ENGINE. > > The ENGINE api is deprecated in openssl >= 3 so in r1908537 we defined/used > > MODSSL_HAVE_ENGINE_API to compile out any code using it, maybe we could do > > that too for OPENSSL_NO_ENGINE like in the this patch? Does it work for your > > case? > > The 2.4.x branch does not have MODSSL_HAVE_ENGINE_API at all, any hint on > what branch to test that is similar to what I can expect to see as 2.4.59? There is https://github.com/apache/httpd/pull/381 which is a backport I plan to propose for the next release. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: bugs-unsubscr...@httpd.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: bugs-h...@httpd.apache.org
[Bug 68080] OPENSSL_NO_ENGINE from openssl/opensslconf.h ignored
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68080 --- Comment #5 from Bernard Spil --- (In reply to Yann Ylavic from comment #2) > Created attachment 39349 [details] > Unset MODSSL_HAVE_ENGINE_API for OPENSSL_NO_ENGINE > > I'm wondering if we still want to allow for "SSLCryptoDevice builtin" when > OPENSSL_NO_ENGINE is set. I don't know how much this setting is used nor if > we should care, but given that "builtin" is the same as no SSLCryptoDevice > maybe we could still let httpd start even if it's built against openssl >= 3 > or OPENSSL_NO_ENGINE. > The ENGINE api is deprecated in openssl >= 3 so in r1908537 we defined/used > MODSSL_HAVE_ENGINE_API to compile out any code using it, maybe we could do > that too for OPENSSL_NO_ENGINE like in the this patch? Does it work for your > case? The 2.4.x branch does not have MODSSL_HAVE_ENGINE_API at all, any hint on what branch to test that is similar to what I can expect to see as 2.4.59? I'm trying to create a patch for the FreeBSD port (I'm part of the apache team in FreeBSD ports). May well go with OpenBSD's solution: settubg ac_cv_func_ENGINE_init=no in configure's env. (https://cvsweb.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb/~checkout~/ports/www/apache-httpd/Makefile?rev=1.126.2.2=text/plain). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: bugs-unsubscr...@httpd.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: bugs-h...@httpd.apache.org
[Bug 68080] OPENSSL_NO_ENGINE from openssl/opensslconf.h ignored
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68080 --- Comment #4 from Joe Orton --- Created attachment 39370 --> https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=39370=edit allow SSLCryptoDevice builtin to be configured w/o any ENGINE support in openSSL -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: bugs-unsubscr...@httpd.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: bugs-h...@httpd.apache.org
[Bug 68080] OPENSSL_NO_ENGINE from openssl/opensslconf.h ignored
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68080 --- Comment #3 from Joe Orton --- (In reply to Yann Ylavic from comment #2) > Created attachment 39349 [details] > Unset MODSSL_HAVE_ENGINE_API for OPENSSL_NO_ENGINE +1 > I'm wondering if we still want to allow for "SSLCryptoDevice builtin" when > OPENSSL_NO_ENGINE is set. I don't know how much this setting is used nor if > we should care, but given that "builtin" is the same as no SSLCryptoDevice > maybe we could still let httpd start even if it's built against openssl >= 3 > or OPENSSL_NO_ENGINE. +1, and removing the: #if defined(HAVE_OPENSSL_ENGINE_H) && defined(HAVE_ENGINE_INIT) should do it? > The ENGINE api is deprecated in openssl >= 3 so in r1908537 we defined/used > MODSSL_HAVE_ENGINE_API to compile out any code using it, maybe we could do > that too for OPENSSL_NO_ENGINE like in the this patch? Does it work for your > case? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: bugs-unsubscr...@httpd.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: bugs-h...@httpd.apache.org
[Bug 64242] Backport of r1870095 and r1870097 from trunk to fix TLS 1.3 client cert authentication for POST requests
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64242 Joe Orton changed: What|Removed |Added Component|Core|mod_ssl -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: bugs-unsubscr...@httpd.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: bugs-h...@httpd.apache.org
[Bug 64242] Backport of r1870095 and r1870097 from trunk to fix TLS 1.3 client cert authentication for POST requests
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64242 Joe Orton changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #2 from Joe Orton --- This was done in r1881713 and is resolved in 2.4.57+. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: bugs-unsubscr...@httpd.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: bugs-h...@httpd.apache.org
