Re: [openssl-dev] MacOS defaults?

On Mon, Mar 7, 2016 at 3:57 PM, Jeffrey Walton wrote: > On Sun, Mar 6, 2016 at 6:05 PM, Andy Polyakov wrote: Hmm. So why do I see this on my macbook? $ arch i386 >>> >>> Try "uname -m" >> >> This is not reliable. Because it must have

Re: [openssl-dev] MacOS defaults?

On Sun, Mar 6, 2016 at 6:05 PM, Andy Polyakov wrote: >>> Hmm. So why do I see this on my macbook? >>> >>> $ arch >>> i386 >> >> Try "uname -m" > > This is not reliable. Because it must have changed recently, it used to > be i386 even on 64-bit systems. sysctl -n

Re: [openssl-dev] MacOS defaults?

>>>And I get i486 (sic!) on proven to be 64-bit Mac. >> >> Yes another proof that we cannot rely on “arch” on the newer Mac OS X >> boxes. > >I meant that I get i486 from 'machine’! I.e. what I tried to say all >along is that one can't trust 'arch' *nor* 'machine' or 'uname -m' to >identify

Re: [openssl-dev] MacOS defaults?

>>> Try >>> $ machine >>> >>> Apparently "arch" is not only old (the latest release was in July >>> 2010), but it does not differentiate between Intel-32 and Intel-64. >>> >>> On my own Mac (proven to be 64-bit :) arch returns "i386", machine >>> returns "x86_64h". >> >> And I get i486 (sic!) on

Re: [openssl-dev] MacOS defaults?

On 3/7/16, 11:05 , "openssl-dev on behalf of Andy Polyakov" wrote: >> Try >> $ machine >> >> Apparently "arch" is not only old (the latest release was in July >>2010), but it does not differentiate between Intel-32 and Intel-64.

Re: [openssl-dev] MacOS defaults?

> Try > $ machine > > Apparently "arch" is not only old (the latest release was in July 2010), but > it does not differentiate between Intel-32 and Intel-64. > > On my own Mac (proven to be 64-bit :) arch returns "i386", machine returns > "x86_64h". And I get i486 (sic!) on proven to be

Re: [openssl-dev] MacOS defaults?

B-10 to LTE - an absolute must for running 64-bit stuff on Macs. :-) :) :) Sent from my BlackBerry 10 smartphone on the Verizon Wireless 4G LTE network.   Original Message   From: Ben Laurie Sent: Monday, March 7, 2016 04:22 To: OpenSSL development Reply To: openssl-dev@openssl.org Subject: Re: [open

Re: [openssl-dev] MacOS defaults?

> On Mar 7, 2016, at 5:01 AM, Ben Laurie wrote: > > On 7 March 2016 at 09:59, Andy Polyakov wrote: >> Hmm. So why do I see this on my macbook? >> >> $ arch >> i386 > > Try "uname -m" This is not reliable. Because it must

Re: [openssl-dev] MacOS defaults?

On 7 March 2016 at 09:59, Andy Polyakov wrote: > Hmm. So why do I see this on my macbook? > > $ arch > i386 Try "uname -m" >>> >>> This is not reliable. Because it must have changed recently, it used to >>> be i386 even on 64-bit systems. sysctl -n

Re: [openssl-dev] MacOS defaults?

Hmm. So why do I see this on my macbook? $ arch i386 >>> >>> Try "uname -m" >> >> This is not reliable. Because it must have changed recently, it used to >> be i386 even on 64-bit systems. sysctl -n hw.optional.x86_64 is the way >> to go, it's right there in ./config... > >

Re: [openssl-dev] MacOS defaults?

On 6 March 2016 at 23:05, Andy Polyakov wrote: >>> Hmm. So why do I see this on my macbook? >>> >>> $ arch >>> i386 >> >> Try "uname -m" > > This is not reliable. Because it must have changed recently, it used to > be i386 even on 64-bit systems. sysctl -n hw.optional.x86_64 is

Re: [openssl-dev] MacOS defaults?

On 6 March 2016 at 22:40, Viktor Dukhovni wrote: > >> On Mar 6, 2016, at 12:00 PM, Ben Laurie wrote: >> >> Hmm. So why do I see this on my macbook? >> >> $ arch >> i386 > > Try "uname -m" x86_64 But AIUI, uname -m tells me what hardware I've got,

Re: [openssl-dev] MacOS defaults?

>> Hmm. So why do I see this on my macbook? >> >> $ arch >> i386 > > Try "uname -m" This is not reliable. Because it must have changed recently, it used to be i386 even on 64-bit systems. sysctl -n hw.optional.x86_64 is the way to go, it's right there in ./config... -- openssl-dev mailing list

Re: [openssl-dev] MacOS defaults?

> On Mar 6, 2016, at 12:00 PM, Ben Laurie wrote: > > Hmm. So why do I see this on my macbook? > > $ arch > i386 Try "uname -m" -- Viktor. -- openssl-dev mailing list To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-dev

Re: [openssl-dev] MacOS defaults?

> Hmm. So why do I see this on my macbook? > > $ arch > i386 I suppose you have to hook up BlackBerry 10 with Verizon LTE plan? :-) :-) :-) -- openssl-dev mailing list To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-dev

Re: [openssl-dev] MacOS defaults?

the Verizon Wireless 4G LTE network. > *From: *Ben Laurie > *Sent: *Sunday, March 6, 2016 06:21 > *To: *OpenSSL development > *Reply To: *openssl-dev@openssl.org > *Subject: *[openssl-dev] MacOS defaults? > > Currently OpenSSL defaults to 32 bit in MacOS. I'm told it might b

Re: [openssl-dev] MacOS defaults?

> On Mar 6, 2016, at 6:20 AM, Ben Laurie wrote: > > Currently OpenSSL defaults to 32 bit in MacOS. I'm told it might be better to > default to 64 bit these days. > > Does anyone have any views? I support a switch to a 64bit default. -- Viktor. -- openssl-dev

Re: [openssl-dev] MacOS defaults?

] MacOS defaults? Currently OpenSSL defaults to 32 bit in MacOS. I'm told it might be better to default to 64 bit these days. Does anyone have any views? smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature -- openssl-dev mailing list To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo

[openssl-dev] MacOS defaults?

Currently OpenSSL defaults to 32 bit in MacOS. I'm told it might be better to default to 64 bit these days. Does anyone have any views? -- openssl-dev mailing list To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-dev

Re: Reporting an Issue with OpenSSL in MacOS SDK 10.8

That's right - I missed that (my bad!). Thanks. Cheers, Max On 7/22/14, 7:02 PM, Viktor Dukhovni wrote: On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 09:37:13AM -0400, Massimiliano Pala wrote: working on porting my libpki implementation (based on OpenSSL) to MacOS I found out an issue that is not really related

Reporting an Issue with OpenSSL in MacOS SDK 10.8

Hi all, working on porting my libpki implementation (based on OpenSSL) to MacOS I found out an issue that is not really related to the code itself but the distributed version in the SDK. In particular, I found out that several functions' signatures have been altered in their return codes

Reporting an Issue with OpenSSL in MacOS SDK 10.8

Hi all, working on porting my libpki implementation (based on OpenSSL) to MacOS I found out an issue that is not really related to the code itself but the distributed version in the SDK. In particular, I found out that several functions' signatures have been altered in their return codes

Reporting an Issue with OpenSSL in MacOS SDK 10.8

Hi all, working on porting my LibPKI implementation (based on OpenSSL) to MacOS I found out an issue that is not really related to the code itself but the distributed version in the SDK. In particular, I found out that several functions' signatures have been altered in their return codes

Re: Reporting an Issue with OpenSSL in MacOS SDK 10.8

On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 09:37:13AM -0400, Massimiliano Pala wrote: working on porting my libpki implementation (based on OpenSSL) to MacOS I found out an issue that is not really related to the code itself but the distributed version in the SDK. Apple ships OpenSSL 0.9.8. In particular, I

OpenSSL for MacOS

Hi! Initial support for MacOS is making its first appearance in the *upcoming* snapshot, namely ftp://ftp.openssl.org/snapshot/openssl-SNAP-19991220.tar.gz. Those who are too impatient to wait till 19:30 GMT can fetch it at http://www.openssl.org/~appro/openssl.tar.gz (when the web server comes

Re: OpenSSL for MacOS

Roy! I've changed your MacSockets a little bit so that synopsis resembles more Unix. Okay! I'll take a look and try to stay in-synch. -Roy __ OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org Development