"Salz, Rich" wrote:
|> c_zlib.c:113:5: warning: excess elements in struct initializer
|> NULL,
|> ^~~~
|
|Are you sure you have an accurate copy of master?
|
|The EX_DATA was removed in 9a555706a3fb8f6622e1049ab510a12f4e1bc6a2 \
|as part of making the COMP structures opaque.
T
Matt Caswell wrote:
|On 19/05/15 17:40, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
|> I think that we should just provide the SSLv23_client_method define
|> without the need to enable something, and I guess I missed
|> something during the review in that case.
|
|The reason you need to enable something is that SSLv
> He's right, the c_zlib.c is broken if you compile with '-DZLIB'
> (and not '-DZLIB_SHARED'):
Ah. Thanks, now I get it.
The attached patch seems to fix the build, but exposes a possible memory leak;
ssltest fails. I won't get a chance to look at this until next week, in case
anyone wants to
Kurt Roeckx wrote:
|On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 08:03:05PM +0200, Steffen Nurpmeso wrote:
|> Steffen Nurpmeso wrote:
|>|Kurt Roeckx wrote:
|>||I think that we should just provide the SSLv23_client_method define
|>||without the need to enable something, and I guess I missed
|>||something during
Salz, Rich wrote:
c_zlib.c:113:5: warning: excess elements in struct initializer
NULL,
^~~~
Are you sure you have an accurate copy of master?
The EX_DATA was removed in 9a555706a3fb8f6622e1049ab510a12f4e1bc6a2 as part of
making the COMP structures opaque.
He's right, the c_
> c_zlib.c:113:5: warning: excess elements in struct initializer
> NULL,
> ^~~~
Are you sure you have an accurate copy of master?
The EX_DATA was removed in 9a555706a3fb8f6622e1049ab510a12f4e1bc6a2 as part of
making the COMP structures opaque.
___
On 19/05/15 17:40, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> I think that we should just provide the SSLv23_client_method define
> without the need to enable something, and I guess I missed
> something during the review in that case.
The reason you need to enable something is that SSLv23_client_method is
now depreca
On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 08:03:05PM +0200, Steffen Nurpmeso wrote:
> Steffen Nurpmeso wrote:
> |Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> ||I think that we should just provide the SSLv23_client_method define
> ||without the need to enable something, and I guess I missed
> ||something during the review in that case
Steffen Nurpmeso wrote:
|Kurt Roeckx wrote:
||I think that we should just provide the SSLv23_client_method define
||without the need to enable something, and I guess I missed
||something during the review in that case.
|
|Thanks for the clarification.
Ehm, one more nit: in order to be able
Kurt Roeckx wrote:
|I think that we should just provide the SSLv23_client_method define
|without the need to enable something, and I guess I missed
|something during the review in that case.
Thanks for the clarification.
--steffen
___
openssl-dev ma
On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 05:03:12PM +0100, Matt Caswell wrote:
> >
> > No. The change is not a property of the version number.
> > I have OpenSSL 0.9.7 (plus patches...) without SSLv{2,3}.
> >
> > Index: HTTP.c
> > ===
> > RCS file: /cv
Hello,
i've just read on the Lynx list about compilation error because of
a missing SSLv23_method() and indeed [1] says it is deprecated and
a new TLS_client_method() is to be used instead. Now i've
searched on Gmane but i couldn't find just any word. (Let's just
hope that there will be TLS v1.4,
Matt Caswell wrote:
I just posted the following to lynx-dev:
I didn't get that post.
The OP suggested this:
+#if (OPENSSL_VERSION_NUMBER >= 0x1010L)
+ ssl_ctx = SSL_CTX_new(TLSv1_client_method());
+#else
ssl_ctx = SSL_CTX_new(SSLv23_client_method());
+#endif
This is not
On 19/05/15 16:28, Steffen Nurpmeso wrote:
> Hello,
> i've just read on the Lynx list about compilation error because of
> a missing SSLv23_method() and indeed [1] says it is deprecated and
> a new TLS_client_method() is to be used instead. Now i've
> searched on Gmane but i couldn't find just a
14 matches
Mail list logo
