On 2016-12-11 21:07:14 [+0100], Michael Meskes wrote:
> Sorry, wasn't precise enough it seems. I was wondering why you left out
> the third possible option, namely the compatibility API in libssl 1.1.
Ach. It does not work that way, this "compatibility" API is defined by
the openssl build and
> > What are you trying to do here? Reopen 828267 and merge with
> > itself?
> > There is no other bug mentioned. What do I miss?
>
> Yeah. Not very smart. I intended to merge it with 846543.
So there is already 846543 to track this problem. I don't really see
the point in reopening 828267 and
control: merge -1 846543
On 2016-12-11 09:54:42 [+0100], Michael Meskes wrote:
> What are you trying to do here? Reopen 828267 and merge with itself?
> There is no other bug mentioned. What do I miss?
Yeah. Not very smart. I intended to merge it with 846543.
> > from the change [0] you use say
> control: reopen -1
> control: merge -1 828267
What are you trying to do here? Reopen 828267 and merge with itself?
There is no other bug mentioned. What do I miss?
> from the change [0] you use say that a compatible API is used but the
> CFLAG change makes no sense. This is probably a miss
4 matches
Mail list logo
