openssl.pc is copied into place with no chmod.
Why can't install -m644 be used? If you're already using unix centric cp,
what's wrong with install?
mrc
--
Mike Castle [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.netcom.com/~dalgoda/
We are all of us living in the shadow of Manhattan. --
Good catch, thanks. I added an appropriate chmod, which resolves this ticket.
As for why we don't use install: it's currently more work than to just add a chmod,
and we're not entirely sure it exists everywhere. I'll investigate when I have more
time on my hands.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] - Fri Jul
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] on Fri, 4 Jul 2003 00:12:24 +0200, Frédéric Giudicelli
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
groups The problem is the following, yes your code (ERR_pop_to_mark/ERR_set_mark)
groups is fine when a child function is adding a new error, however, what happends
groups when it calls
I just made the change frmo CCITT to ITU-T. The result of a make
update looks OK, so I think that resolves this ticket.
[jaenicke - Thu Jun 13 13:55:36 2002]:
[jaenicke - Mon Jun 10 17:42:40 2002]:
I have made some further modifications: I did not like the direct
use
of
2 23 42 for
I solved this a little while ago. 'openssl ca' defaults to unique DNs,
but can be made work ilke you want with the configuration
option 'unique_subject' See the docs at
http://www.openssl.org/docs/apps/ca.html#CONFIGURATION_FILE_OPTIONS as
well as usage examples in.
Note that when after
Because, I could stub the default implementation, and if the error
handling has been disabled, then I just don't call the default
implementation function.
Frédéric Giudicelli
http://www.newpki.org
- Original Message -
From: Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL
Because, I could stub the default implementation, and if the error
handling has been disabled, then I just don't call the default
implementation function.
Frédéric Giudicelli
http://www.newpki.org
- Original Message -
From: Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL
OK, what stops you from creating your own implementation table and
fill that with whatever you want, and give that as an argument to
ERR_set_implementation(). I know, it means you have to look in
crypto/err/err.c for each version to see if there's been a change to
ERR_FNS. Guess what? It sounds
OK, what stops you from creating your own implementation table and
fill that with whatever you want, and give that as an argument to
ERR_set_implementation(). I know, it means you have to look in
crypto/err/err.c for each version to see if there's been a change to
ERR_FNS. Guess what? It
