gentle ping
ср, 2 февр. 2022 г. в 10:27, Илья Шипицин :
> Hello,
>
> since QUIC is first class citizen, let us scan it in code analysis.
>
>
> Ilya
>
On Fri, Feb 04, 2022 at 11:54:05PM +0500, Илья Шипицин wrote:
>
> as you already suggested "best effort" support policy, it should not
> require your time.
> am I correct ?
>
Don't worry I will still review and merge patches :-)
--
William Lallemand
On Fri, Feb 04, 2022 at 07:46:44PM +0100, William Lallemand wrote:
>
> On Fri, Feb 04, 2022 at 11:02:24PM +0500, Илья Шипицин wrote:
> > пт, 4 февр. 2022 г. в 19:16, William Lallemand :
> >
> > > On Fri, Feb 04, 2022 at 11:52:06AM +0100, William Lallemand wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I just tried to
as you already suggested "best effort" support policy, it should not
require your time.
am I correct ?
пт, 4 февр. 2022 г. в 23:47, William Lallemand :
> On Fri, Feb 04, 2022 at 11:02:24PM +0500, Илья Шипицин wrote:
> > пт, 4 февр. 2022 г. в 19:16, William Lallemand :
> >
> > > On Fri, Feb 04,
On Fri, Feb 04, 2022 at 11:02:24PM +0500, Илья Шипицин wrote:
> пт, 4 февр. 2022 г. в 19:16, William Lallemand :
>
> > On Fri, Feb 04, 2022 at 11:52:06AM +0100, William Lallemand wrote:
> > >
> > > I just tried to build with the latest boringSSL version, the problem is
> > > on our side:
> > >
>
пт, 4 февр. 2022 г. в 19:16, William Lallemand :
> On Fri, Feb 04, 2022 at 11:52:06AM +0100, William Lallemand wrote:
> >
> > I just tried to build with the latest boringSSL version, the problem is
> > on our side:
> >
> > We are defining X509_OBJECT_get0_X509_CRL() because it does not exist in
>
On Fri, Feb 04, 2022 at 11:52:06AM +0100, William Lallemand wrote:
>
> I just tried to build with the latest boringSSL version, the problem is
> on our side:
>
> We are defining X509_OBJECT_get0_X509_CRL() because it does not exist in
> boringSSL, and inside it we are accessing the members of
On Fri, Feb 04, 2022 at 11:18:50AM +0100, William Lallemand wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 04, 2022 at 09:57:25AM +0100, Remi Tricot-Le Breton wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 02/02/2022 17:49, William Lallemand wrote:
> > >
> > >> Subject: [PATCH 2/7] BUILD: SSL: define X509_OBJECT for BoringSSL
> > >>
> > >>
On Fri, Feb 04, 2022 at 09:57:25AM +0100, Remi Tricot-Le Breton wrote:
>
>
> On 02/02/2022 17:49, William Lallemand wrote:
> >
> >> Subject: [PATCH 2/7] BUILD: SSL: define X509_OBJECT for BoringSSL
> >>
> >> X509_OBJECT is opaque in BonringSSL, since we still use it, let us move it
> >> to
On 02/02/2022 17:49, William Lallemand wrote:
Subject: [PATCH 2/7] BUILD: SSL: define X509_OBJECT for BoringSSL
X509_OBJECT is opaque in BonringSSL, since we still use it, let us move it to
openssl-compat.h
from
10 matches
Mail list logo