RE: [openssl.org #463] PATCH

2003-02-03 Thread Shklover, Vladimir
-Original Message- From: Rich Salz via RT [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, January 22, 2003 11:15 AM To: Shklover, Vladimir Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [openssl.org #463] PATCH 2)Perhaps I did not make it clear but our policy is not to include any cryptographic software directly

RE: [openssl.org #463] PATCH

2003-02-03 Thread Shklover, Vladimir
is expected since 1.0 release? Vladimir -Original Message- From: Andy Polyakov via RT [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2003 3:14 PM To: Shklover, Vladimir Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [openssl.org #463] PATCH 1)I just got aix64-cc shared build succeed

RE: [openssl.org #463] PATCH

2003-01-22 Thread Shklover, Vladimir via RT
is expected since 1.0 release? Vladimir -Original Message- From: Andy Polyakov via RT [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2003 3:14 PM To: Shklover, Vladimir Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [openssl.org #463] PATCH 1)I just got aix64-cc shared build succeed

Re: [openssl.org #463] PATCH

2003-01-22 Thread Rich Salz
2)Perhaps I did not make it clear but our policy is not to include any cryptographic software directly into our applications. You might want to reconsider this policy. Do you expect much revenue from the banned country list? Is it worth the development and support cost of keeping track with

RE: [openssl.org #463] PATCH

2003-01-22 Thread Shklover, Vladimir via RT
-Original Message- From: Rich Salz via RT [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, January 22, 2003 11:15 AM To: Shklover, Vladimir Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [openssl.org #463] PATCH 2)Perhaps I did not make it clear but our policy is not to include any cryptographic software directly

Re: [openssl.org #463] PATCH

2003-01-21 Thread Andy Polyakov via RT
1)Unless I understood you correctly, could you please send me the complete implementation for aix-shared which you want. You have to understand that I don't have access to AIX machine and therefore can't be completely sure what I actually want. What I asked in previous letter is to run the

Re: [openssl.org #463] PATCH

2003-01-21 Thread Andy Polyakov via RT
As you don't appear to be interested in 64-bit build I've decided to settle for following. We leave the code as is [as in openssl-0.9.7-stable-SNAP-20030119.tar.gz or later] and document the aix64-cc case in PROBLEMS in wait for more appropriate solution (covering even gcc:-). BTW. Can use verify

RE: [openssl.org #463] PATCH

2003-01-21 Thread Shklover, Vladimir via RT
:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2003 9:51 AM To: Shklover, Vladimir Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [openssl.org #463] PATCH As you don't appear to be interested in 64-bit build I've decided to settle for following. We leave the code as is [as in openssl-0.9.7-stable-SNAP-20030119

RE: [openssl.org #463] PATCH

2003-01-21 Thread Shklover, Vladimir via RT
] Subject: RE: [openssl.org #463] PATCH 1)I just got aix64-cc shared build succeed with -bautoexp. It was possible to modify Makefile pretty similar to aix43-cc. *** SHARED_LDFLAGS=-q64

Re: [openssl.org #463] PATCH

2003-01-21 Thread Andy Polyakov via RT
1)I just got aix64-cc shared build succeed with -bautoexp. It was possible to modify Makefile pretty similar to aix43-cc. ^^ But the challenge is to construct the rule which can be parametrized through configure line. But as already mentioned, I'd appreciate if you could verify if 'env

RE: [openssl.org #463] PATCH

2003-01-20 Thread Shklover, Vladimir via RT
modified (this less important though). Vladimir -Original Message- From: Andy Polyakov via RT [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Saturday, January 18, 2003 7:25 AM To: Shklover, Vladimir Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [openssl.org #463] PATCH ??? I wasn't ready with it... Pressed

Re: [openssl.org #463] PATCH

2003-01-20 Thread Andy Polyakov via RT
./Configure aix64-cc ... shared - build fails with only libcrypto.a built (no libssl.a) and message + ld -r -o libcrypto.o -bnogc libcrypto.a ld: 0711-245 WARNING: No csects or exported symbols have been saved. + nm -Pg libcrypto.o + grep [BD] + cut -f1 -d + 1

RE: [openssl.org #463] PATCH

2003-01-20 Thread Shklover, Vladimir via RT
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [openssl.org #463] PATCH ./Configure aix64-cc ... shared - build fails with only libcrypto.a built (no libssl.a) and message + ld -r -o libcrypto.o -bnogc libcrypto.a ld: 0711-245 WARNING: No csects or exported symbols have been saved

RE: [openssl.org #463] PATCH

2003-01-20 Thread Shklover, Vladimir via RT
:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, January 20, 2003 2:25 PM To: Shklover, Vladimir Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [openssl.org #463] PATCH Similar result: + ld -b64 -r -o libcrypto.o -bnogc libcrypto.a + nm -Pg libcrypto.o + grep [BD] + cut -f1 -d + 1 libcrypto.exp 0654-210 libcrypto.o

Re: [openssl.org #463] PATCH

2003-01-20 Thread Andy Polyakov
: [openssl.org #463] PATCH Similar result: + ld -b64 -r -o libcrypto.o -bnogc libcrypto.a + nm -Pg libcrypto.o + grep [BD] + cut -f1 -d + 1 libcrypto.exp 0654-210 libcrypto.o is not valid in the current object file mode. Use the -X option to specify the desired object mode

Re: [openssl.org #463] PATCH

2003-01-20 Thread Andy Polyakov via RT
Wrong button again? I wasn't ready with it... It builds shared libraries indeed! Can you test one last thing. Assuming that you have the tree configured with './Configure aix64-cc shared' left. Would following work: cc -q64 -Wl,-bnogc,-bautoexp, 'cc -q64 -qmkshrobj -o libcrypto.so

RE: [openssl.org #463] PATCH

2003-01-20 Thread Shklover, Vladimir via RT
and 0.9.7 seem to be compatible on solaris and linux but not on AIX. Vladimir -Original Message- From: Andy Polyakov via RT [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, January 20, 2003 4:23 PM To: Shklover, Vladimir Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [openssl.org #463] PATCH Wrong button

Re: [openssl.org #463] PATCH

2003-01-18 Thread Andy Polyakov
. Thank you very much for your attention, Vladimir -Original Message- From: Andy Polyakov via RT [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, January 17, 2003 4:27 PM To: Shklover, Vladimir Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [openssl.org #463] PATCH Current version, openssl-0.9.7

Re: [openssl.org #463] PATCH

2003-01-17 Thread Andy Polyakov via RT
Current version, openssl-0.9.7, does not support shared libraries on AIX platform. To openssl-dev mainly. How come did do_aix-shared deserve so special treatment? I mean SHAREDFLAGS being hardcoded directly in Makefile.org? Just wondering... I am sending you the changes which allow to

Re: [openssl.org #463] PATCH

2003-01-17 Thread Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] on Fri, 17 Jan 2003 23:26:40 +0100 (MET), Andy Polyakov via RT [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: rt Current version, rt openssl-0.9.7, does not support shared libraries on AIX platform. rt rt To openssl-dev mainly. How come did do_aix-shared deserve so special rt treatment?

Re: [openssl.org #463] PATCH

2003-01-17 Thread Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker via RT
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] on Fri, 17 Jan 2003 23:26:40 +0100 (MET), Andy Polyakov via RT [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: rt Current version, rt openssl-0.9.7, does not support shared libraries on AIX platform. rt rt To openssl-dev mainly. How come did do_aix-shared deserve so special rt

Re: [openssl.org #463] PATCH

2003-01-17 Thread Andy Polyakov via RT
rt To openssl-dev mainly. How come did do_aix-shared deserve so special rt treatment? I mean SHAREDFLAGS being hardcoded directly in Makefile.org? rt Just wondering... Well, that one is an experiment. Then why AIX specific flags like -bnogc, -bE:lib$$i.exp, -bM:SRE? rt and aix43-cc. rt

RE: [openssl.org #463] PATCH

2003-01-17 Thread Shklover, Vladimir via RT
To: Shklover, Vladimir Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [openssl.org #463] PATCH Current version, openssl-0.9.7, does not support shared libraries on AIX platform. To openssl-dev mainly. How come did do_aix-shared deserve so special treatment? I mean SHAREDFLAGS being hardcoded directly

Re: [openssl.org #463] PATCH

2003-01-17 Thread Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] on Sat, 18 Jan 2003 00:01:39 +0100 (MET), Andy Polyakov via RT [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: rt rt To openssl-dev mainly. How come did do_aix-shared deserve so special rt rt treatment? I mean SHAREDFLAGS being hardcoded directly in Makefile.org? rt rt Just wondering...

Re: [openssl.org #463] PATCH

2003-01-17 Thread Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker via RT
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] on Sat, 18 Jan 2003 00:01:39 +0100 (MET), Andy Polyakov via RT [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: rt rt To openssl-dev mainly. How come did do_aix-shared deserve so special rt rt treatment? I mean SHAREDFLAGS being hardcoded directly in Makefile.org? rt rt Just wondering...