[openssl.org #9] Re: [patch] Sign certs that aren't self signed for x509 -CA

2014-06-27 Thread Rich Salz via RT
Original requestor is willing to let it drop, and nobody else has asked about this so closing it. __ OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org Development Mailing List

[openssl.org #9] Re: [patch] Sign certs that aren't self signed for x509 -CA

2014-06-27 Thread Rich Salz via RT
Original requestor is willing to let it drop, and nobody else has asked about this so closing it. __ OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org Development Mailing List

Re: [openssl.org #9] Re: [patch] Sign certs that aren't self signed for x509 -CA

2004-03-31 Thread Simon Josefsson via RT
Richard Levitte via RT [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I'm honestly very unsure about this one. After all, openssl ca already covers this, so I wonder why there's a need to create another way to do the same thing, and add to the confusion on how to do things.. . How would you use openssl ca to

Re: [openssl.org #9] Re: [patch] Sign certs that aren't self signed for x509 -CA

2004-03-31 Thread Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] on Wed, 31 Mar 2004 11:23:29 +0200 (METDST), Simon Josefsson via RT [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: rt rt Richard Levitte via RT [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: rt rt I'm honestly very unsure about this one. After all, openssl ca rt already covers this, so I wonder why

Re: [openssl.org #9] Re: [patch] Sign certs that aren't self signed for x509 -CA

2004-03-31 Thread Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker via RT
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] on Wed, 31 Mar 2004 11:23:29 +0200 (METDST), Simon Josefsson via RT [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: rt rt Richard Levitte via RT [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: rt rt I'm honestly very unsure about this one. After all, openssl ca rt already covers this, so I wonder why

Re: [openssl.org #9] Re: [patch] Sign certs that aren't self signed for x509 -CA

2004-03-31 Thread Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] on Wed, 31 Mar 2004 11:51:13 +0200 (CEST), Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: levitte In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] on Wed, 31 Mar 2004 11:23:29 +0200 (METDST), Simon Josefsson via RT [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: levitte levitte rt levitte rt Richard

Re: [openssl.org #9] Re: [patch] Sign certs that aren't self signed for x509 -CA

2004-03-31 Thread Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker via RT
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] on Wed, 31 Mar 2004 11:51:13 +0200 (CEST), Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: levitte In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] on Wed, 31 Mar 2004 11:23:29 +0200 (METDST), Simon Josefsson via RT [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: levitte levitte rt levitte rt Richard

[openssl.org #9] Re: [patch] Sign certs that aren't self signed for x509 -CA

2004-03-30 Thread Richard Levitte via RT
I'm honestly very unsure about this one. After all, openssl ca already covers this, so I wonder why there's a need to create another way to do the same thing, and add to the confusion on how to do things.. . [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Thu Apr 25 16:20:45 2002]: What about the patch below for