On Wednesday 01. April 2009 20:18:30 Geoff Thorpe wrote:
OK, I've taken a look at this, and scratched my head a little. It's a
touch complicated by the fact that thread-ids have changed in the head
of development relative to what you're looking at in 0.9.8. But I'm now
wondering if you haven't
On Thursday 02. April 2009 10:27:30 Marc Haisenko wrote:
This should work. I'm wondering if I understood what you meant by The
problem is that locking is not done if the IDs are same. ... If the IDs
are the same, that means you're in the same thread, period!! If that's
not the case, then
On Thursday 02 April 2009 04:44:55 Marc Haisenko wrote:
Just a little load thinking... my patch *seems* to fix the blinding
issue. All the patch does is to make sure that once the thread/process
id's are different locking is *always* done and rsa-mt_blinding is
always used.
But since locking
Forgive my frustration, but which god do I need to sacrifice to to get some
attention ? Even a go away, we don't care would be OK...
Marc
--
Marc Haisenko
Team Leader and Senior Developer
Comdasys AG
Rüdesheimer Str. 7
80686 München
Germany
Tel.: +49 (0)89 548 433 321
Submit your patch to r...@openssl.org, and it'll go into the request
tracking system. I would also recommend that you wait for a bit more
than a single day before getting irritated with people who work on
this in their spare time, and have day jobs.
-Kyle H
On Wed, Apr 1, 2009 at 1:48 AM, Marc
On Wednesday 01. April 2009 10:54:39 Kyle Hamilton wrote:
Submit your patch to r...@openssl.org, and it'll go into the request
tracking system. I would also recommend that you wait for a bit more
than a single day before getting irritated with people who work on
this in their spare time, and
I'm only seeing two, the one with the patch and the one with the what
god do you have to sacrifice?.
However, that doesn't mean much of anything, as I'm horrible with
managing my emails.
r...@openssl.org is the best place to send patches, as it creates a
ticket in the Request Tracking system
On Wednesday 01. April 2009 11:03:55 Kyle Hamilton wrote:
I'm only seeing two, the one with the patch and the one with the what
god do you have to sacrifice?.
I was refering to the two threads cited in my patch e-mail:
[1] - http://marc.info/?l=openssl-devm=123754568501758w=2
[2] -
On Wed, Apr 1, 2009 at 2:12 AM, Marc Haisenko haise...@comdasys.com wrote:
On Wednesday 01. April 2009 11:03:55 Kyle Hamilton wrote:
I was refering to the two threads cited in my patch e-mail:
[1] - http://marc.info/?l=openssl-devm=123754568501758w=2
[2] -
On Wednesday 01. April 2009 11:23:45 Kyle Hamilton wrote:
On Wed, Apr 1, 2009 at 2:12 AM, Marc Haisenko haise...@comdasys.com wrote:
On Wednesday 01. April 2009 11:03:55 Kyle Hamilton wrote:
I was refering to the two threads cited in my patch e-mail:
[1] -
Marc Haisenko wrote:
... Maybe it would be a good idea to document that on the openssl.org
homepage, because before I submitted my patch I was searching the site for
guidelines on how the project wants to have patches submitted, to no avail.
There is no mentioning of a Request Tracker either
On Wednesday 01 April 2009 04:48:01 Marc Haisenko wrote:
Forgive my frustration, but which god do I need to sacrifice to to get
some attention ? Even a go away, we don't care would be OK...
I have your email tagged for attention, but haven't had a good enough
moment to look at it. But please
OK, I've taken a look at this, and scratched my head a little. It's a
touch complicated by the fact that thread-ids have changed in the head
of development relative to what you're looking at in 0.9.8. But I'm now
wondering if you haven't misunderstood the nature of openssl's threading
support;
13 matches
Mail list logo
