On Wed, Apr 1, 2009 at 6:09 AM, Lutz Jaenicke wrote:
>
> Probably you are not around long enough for the last (0.9.8) release :-)
> In the past we tended to have the success reports sent to openssl-dev.
> The problem with the success reports is that they are actually invalidated
> with every new i
Kyle Hamilton wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 1, 2009 at 4:55 AM, Lutz Jaenicke wrote:
>
>> Hi Kyle,
>>
>> thank you very much for reports, they are currently sitting in the
>> moderation queue. I would kindly ask you and other testers to either
>> * send success messages to the list with just the platfor
On Wed, Apr 1, 2009 at 4:55 AM, Lutz Jaenicke wrote:
> Hi Kyle,
>
> thank you very much for reports, they are currently sitting in the
> moderation queue. I would kindly ask you and other testers to either
> * send success messages to the list with just the platform mentioned
> * send failures to
Kyle Hamilton wrote:
> I hope the test reports I sent to -bugs are useful. I'm on a Mac OSX
> 10.5.6 machine, Intel-based, and I ran tests in both 32 and 64 bit
> modes, both without and with the optional features. I do not have gmp
> installed, nor zlib, so I cannot vouch for their usability; I
I hope the test reports I sent to -bugs are useful. I'm on a Mac OSX
10.5.6 machine, Intel-based, and I ran tests in both 32 and 64 bit
modes, both without and with the optional features. I do not have gmp
installed, nor zlib, so I cannot vouch for their usability; I did not
test krb5, and I also
