[openssl-dev] Question about dynamically loadable engines on Cygwin / Mingw

Hi, I've got a question to the Cygwin / Mingw community, regarding the naming of dynamic engines. >From looking at Makefile.shared et al, the engines get the same kind of prefixes as a standard shared library (but without the accompanying import library, of course). So the capi engine gets

Re: [openssl-dev] [openssl.org #4305] ChaCha20 assembly bugs

>> 1. In chacha-x86_64.pl, .Ltail: >> >> 2. In chacha-x86_64.pl, .Loop_tail_ssse3: >> >> 3. In chacha-x86.pl, loop: > > Fix is upcoming. Thanks! > >> 4. The assembly versions crash if you pass in an empty input/output. The >> generic C code handles this fine. (I'll defer to you whether this is a

[openssl-dev] Openssl-SNAP-20160214 issues

Please explain why making all in ssl... gcc -I.. -I../include -DDSO_DLFCN -DHAVE_DLFCN_H -DOPENSSL_EXPERIMENTAL_JPAKE -DOPENSSL_THREADS -DOPENSSL_PIC -DOPENSSL_BN_ASM_PART_WORDS -DOPENSSL_BN_ASM_MONT -DOPENSSL_BN_ASM_GF2m -DSHA1_ASM -DSHA256_ASM -DSHA512_ASM -DMD5_ASM -DRMD160_ASM -DAES_ASM

Re: [openssl-dev] Openssl-SNAP-20160214 issues

> Please explain why My guess would be a bug. :) For these kinds of things, it helps to give the config line you used. AT any rate, see if this fixes it. Add this line to ssl_utst.c: static const struct openssl_ssl_test_functions ssl_test_functions = { ssl_init_wbio_buffer,

Re: [openssl-dev] Openssl-SNAP-20160214 issues

On Sun, Feb 14, 2016 at 08:36:43PM +, Salz, Rich wrote: > > > Please explain why > > My guess would be a bug. :) > > For these kinds of things, it helps to give the config line you used. > > AT any rate, see if this fixes it. Add this line to ssl_utst.c: > static const struct

Re: [openssl-dev] Openssl-SNAP-20160214 issues

On Sun, Feb 14, 2016 at 02:19:13PM -0700, The Doctor wrote: > On Sun, Feb 14, 2016 at 08:36:43PM +, Salz, Rich wrote: > > > > > Please explain why > > > > My guess would be a bug. :) > > > > For these kinds of things, it helps to give the config line you used. > > > > AT any rate, see if

Re: [openssl-dev] Endianess info

> > Does this patch work for you? > > I'd vote against [catering this information in public header]. As it > stands now -D[BL]_ENDIAN in OpenSSL config lines is actually just an > optimization flag, and not as significant one. "Optimization flag" means > that you can actually

Re: [openssl-dev] Endianess info

> I'd vote against [catering this information in public header]. As it stands > now - > D[BL]_ENDIAN in OpenSSL config lines is actually just an optimization flag, Okay, you know more about this stuff than I do. I'll leave it to you to help Dmitry if he needs it :) -- openssl-dev mailing

Re: [openssl-dev] How to do reneg with client certs in 1.1.0 API

Am 08.02.2016 um 15:26 schrieb Matt Caswell: On 08/02/16 13:45, Tomas Mraz wrote: On Po, 2016-02-08 at 12:34 +, Matt Caswell wrote: On 08/02/16 12:11, Rainer Jung wrote: Renegotiation isn't entirely within the control of the server. A server can request that a renegotiation takes

Re: [openssl-dev] Endianess info

Dear Andy, On Sun, Feb 14, 2016 at 1:27 PM, Andy Polyakov wrote: > > Does this patch work for you? > > I'd vote against [catering this information in public header]. As it > stands now -D[BL]_ENDIAN in OpenSSL config lines is actually just an > optimization flag, and not as

Re: [openssl-dev] Endianess info

> Does this patch work for you? I'd vote against [catering this information in public header]. As it stands now -D[BL]_ENDIAN in OpenSSL config lines is actually just an optimization flag, and not as significant one. "Optimization flag" means that you can actually omit it, and it will still work,

Re: [openssl-dev] Endianess info

Dear Rich, Thank you, this patch works for me. On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 9:35 PM, Salz, Rich wrote: > Does this patch work for you? > > ; git diff > > diff --git a/Configure b/Configure > > index 3dc6a42..b36bc32 100755 > > --- a/Configure > > +++ b/Configure > > @@ -1553,6