Re: DETECT_GNU_LD

2002-02-26 Thread Andy Polyakov
Is there any reason why gcc -print-prog-name=collect2 is used for detecting the linker instead of gcc -print-prog-name=ld? As far as I know collect2 isn't actually used when linking c code. I've come across a system where gcc -print-prog-name=ld points to the vendor linker and gcc

Re: 0.9.7-beta4: test_rsa fails on ia64

2002-11-26 Thread Andy Polyakov
the test 'trsa' in the testsuite fails on ia64: testing rsa conversions p - d p - p d - d make[1]: *** [test_rsa] Error 1 make[1]: Leaving directory `/usr/src/packages/BUILD/openssl-0.9.7_beta4/test' make: *** [tests] Error 2 I managed to reproduce the problem

Re: [openssl.org #354] openssl problem on tru64

2002-11-26 Thread Andy Polyakov
We're making test on DUnix Tru 64 and we had problem with this library: make test result: test BN_sqr Square test failed! Our op. sys is: OSF1 link.softax.local V5.1 732 alpha our compiler is: Compaq C V6.3-025 on Compaq Tru64 UNIX V5.1 (Rev. 732) I failed to reproduce the problem with

Re: [openssl.org #257] openssl-0.9.7-beta3 on Irix

2002-11-26 Thread Andy Polyakov
No, I get exactly same error: NIST curve P-521 -- Generator: x = 0xC6858E06B70404E9CD9E3ECB662395B4429C648139053FB521F828AF606B4D3DBAA14B5E77EFE75928FE1DC127A2FFA8DE3348B3C1856A429BF97E7E31C2E5BD66 y =

Re: [PATCH] supporting the x86_64 architecture

2002-11-26 Thread Andy Polyakov
to facilitate building openssl on the x86_64 platform I suggest to apply the attached patch. +linux-x86_64, gcc:-DL_ENDIAN -DNO_ASM: Linux/x86_64 suports two ABIs. As far as I understand it's perfectly possible to compile gcc so that it supports both. Which one will be default? To ensure that

Re: [openssl.org #257] openssl-0.9.7-beta3 on Irix

2002-11-27 Thread Andy Polyakov
No, I get exactly same error: NIST curve P-521 -- Generator: x = 0xC6858E06B70404E9CD9E3ECB662395B4429C648139053FB521F828AF606B4D3DBAA14B5E77EFE75928FE1DC127A2FFA8DE3348B3C1856A429BF97E7E31C2E5BD66 y =

Re: [openssl.org #257] openssl-0.9.7-beta3 on Irix

2002-11-27 Thread Andy Polyakov
so, once more. I've tested now openssl-0.9.7-beta4: ./Configure irix-mips3-cc --prefix=/usr/local/openssl --openssldir=/usr/local/openssl no-threads Configuring for irix-mips3-cc IsWindows=0 CC=cc CFLAG =-DDSO_DLFCN -DHAVE_DLFCN_H -DOPENSSL_NO_KRB5 -n32 -O2

Re: When scrubbing secrets in memory doesn't work

2002-11-29 Thread Andy Polyakov
I guess we should put out a call for anyone of a speed-obsessed inclination to let us know if they notice any overhead problems with these changes. Does the code have to be so obscure? Is it recognized that it's byte-order dependent? Is it intentional? On little-endians it is

Re: Trying to understand bn_div_words()

2002-12-02 Thread Andy Polyakov
levitte bn_div_words(0xC383,0x838B4B53,0x8000) Hmm, a call like that gave me an aruthmetic error on Linux... According to bc 0xC383838B4B53 / 0x8000 = 0x18707. The result is 33 bits or in other words the operation *overflows*. According to IA-32 manual overflow is

Re: status of support sparc64 on linux

2002-12-04 Thread Andy Polyakov
I just changed ./Configure line: #linux64-sparcv9,sparc64-linux-gcc:-m64 -mcpu=v9 -DB_ENDIAN -DTERMIO -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -Wall -DBN_DIV2W::-D_REENTRANT:ULTRASPARC::BN_LLONG RC4_CHAR RC4_CHUNK DES_UNROLL BF_PTRasm/md5-sparcv9.o:, by linux64-sparcv9,gcc:-m64 -mcpu=v9

Re: status of support sparc64 on linux

2002-12-04 Thread Andy Polyakov
appro linux64-sparcv9,gcc:-m64 -mcpu=ultrasparc -DB_ENDIAN -DTERMIO -O3 appro -fomit-frame-pointer -Wall::-D_REENTRANT:ULTRASPARC::SIXTY_FOUR_BIT_LONG appro RC4_CHAR RC4_CHUNK DES_UNROLL BF_PTRasm/md5-sparcv9.o:, Hmm, I assume we can make that change in Configure, eh? My idea was to

Re: status of support sparc64 on linux

2002-12-04 Thread Andy Polyakov
linux64-sparcv9,gcc:-m64 -mcpu=ultrasparc -DB_ENDIAN -DTERMIO -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -Wall::-D_REENTRANT:ULTRASPARC::SIXTY_FOUR_BIT_LONG RC4_CHAR RC4_CHUNK DES_UNROLL BF_PTRasm/md5-sparcv9.o:, all test passed (./Configure linux64-sparcv9 no-asm without no-asm). Next step is to add

Re: status of support sparc64 on linux

2002-12-04 Thread Andy Polyakov
error in make: oops! Next step is to add shared lib bits. Therefore change to: linux64-sparcv9,gcc:-m64 -mcpu=ultrasparc -DB_ENDIAN -DTERMIO -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -Wall::-D_REENTRANT:ULTRASPARC::SIXTY_FOUR_BIT_LONG RC4_CHAR RC4_CHUNK DES_UNROLL

Re: status of support sparc64 on linux

2002-12-04 Thread Andy Polyakov
Does it build? +gcc -m64 -shared -o libcrypto.so.0.9.7 -Wl,-soname=libcrypto.so.0.9.7 -Wl,-Bsymbolic -Wl,--whole-archive libcrypto.a -Wl,--no-whole-archive -L. -lc libcrypto.a(dso_dlfcn.o)(.text+0x68): In function `dlfcn_load': : undefined reference to `dlopen' Double oops:-) Of course

Re: 0.9.7-beta4: test_rsa fails on ia64

2002-12-05 Thread Andy Polyakov
the test 'trsa' in the testsuite fails on ia64: testing rsa conversions p - d p - p d - d make[1]: *** [test_rsa] Error 1 make[1]: Leaving directory `/usr/src/packages/BUILD/openssl-0.9.7_beta4/test' make: *** [tests] Error 2 I managed to

Re: status of support sparc64 on linux

2002-12-06 Thread Andy Polyakov
Ok. the last line in Configure that I've tested is: linux64-sparcv9,... do you want that I test another configuration? Well, it would be nice if you could verify that linux-sparcv9 and linux-sparcv8 work... What is necessary to include this configuration in 0.9.7-snapshots? Nothing. It

Re: 0.9.7-beta4: test_rsa fails on ia64

2002-12-06 Thread Andy Polyakov
Yes, this patch helps with gcc 3.2.1, and not only the test_rsa passes, but also the other test that had failed (test_sid). Does it mean that the *whole* test suite passes? I.e. 'make test' actually finishes completely and without error? As mentioned NUE-1.2 fails in test/dsatest...

Re: [STATUS] OpenSSL (Sun 8-Dec-2002)

2002-12-09 Thread Andy Polyakov
o BN_mod_mul verification fails for mips3-sgi-irix unless configured with no-asm Who reported this? I can't reproduce it! A. __ OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org Development

Re: [openssl.org #391] compilation failure

2002-12-09 Thread Andy Polyakov
However, I should note that I read file PROBLEMS and did not see anything about tru64. Maybe there should be a pointer to the FAQ? Well, there is a pointer from ./FAQ to ./PROBLEMS... And to me it appears like ./PROBLEMS could be merged into the ./FAQ... So I suppose consensus is not

Re: [PATCH] supporting the x86_64 architecture

2002-12-11 Thread Andy Polyakov
I have been working on BN assembler aided implementation that would need some benchmarking. It should give around 3x speed-up... Preliminary patch relative to 0.9.6h is available at http://www.openssl.org/~appro/. Once it's confirmed to be working on real hardware, it will be ported/merged to

Re: [PATCH] supporting the x86_64 architecture

2002-12-12 Thread Andy Polyakov
appro I have been working on appro BN assembler aided implementation that would need some benchmarking. It appro should give around 3x speed-up... appro appro Preliminary patch relative to 0.9.6h is available at appro http://www.openssl.org/~appro/. Once it's confirmed to be working on

Re: [PATCH] supporting the x86_64 architecture

2002-12-12 Thread Andy Polyakov
appro Well, *if* this is supposed to be the last beta, then the only question appro is if we *dare* to merge the code directly into the final version, i.e. appro without exposing it in beta. I consider that we can dare to do so as appro long as SuSE Labs promise that they would double-check

Re: [openssl.org #239] Solaris 2/Intel shared libssl/libcrypto contain text relocations

2002-12-13 Thread Andy Polyakov
This message goes to openssl-dev and not to rt as I'd like to discuss couple of issues before the code is committed. And even better news are that it appears to be possible to squeeze out a register at the cost of [presumably] slight performance degradation on Pentium II and earlier. So how

Re: [openssl.org #272] BN gives wrong result for mod_exp (all forms)

2002-12-13 Thread Andy Polyakov
Gotten anywhere? Not yet. Well, I can tell that it's not assembler fault (it fails even if I compile with no-asm) and it's the same fault with both cc and gcc. Weird... Is this part of the things you and I have discussed today? No. A.

Re: [openssl.org #272] BN gives wrong result for mod_exp (all forms)

2002-12-13 Thread Andy Polyakov
Gotten anywhere? Not yet. Well, I can tell that it's not assembler fault (it fails even if I compile with no-asm) and it's the same fault with both cc and gcc. Weird... Is this part of the things you and I have discussed today? No. A. ^^ But it probably should be! A.

Re: [openssl.org #239] Solaris 2/Intel shared libssl/libcryptocontain text relocations

2002-12-13 Thread Andy Polyakov
appro Should we check for -.pic also? I haven't seen any compiler with such a flag, yet... ??? What do you mean? All compilers support both -.PIC and -.pic! Or do you mean that you have interpreted . literally? I ment . as an arbitrary character in regular expression and is it was depicted in

Re: [openssl.org #239] Solaris 2/Intel shared libssl/libcryptocontain text relocations

2002-12-13 Thread Andy Polyakov
appro And even more generally how is it with PIC under Windows appro anyway? Is it an issue? I've gotten the impression so far that PIC isn't an issue in Windows. On the second thought I cam to realize that that form of lea instruction can't be used in PIC... One has to use mov... But then I

Re: [openssl.org #239] Solaris 2/Intel sharedlibssl/libcryptocontain text relocations

2002-12-13 Thread Andy Polyakov
appro appro Should we check for -.pic also? appro appro I haven't seen any compiler with such a flag, yet... appro appro ??? What do you mean? All compilers support both -.PIC and appro -.pic! Or do you mean that you have interpreted . literally? Let me rephrase that: I haven't seen a

Re: [openssl.org #239] Solaris 2/Intel shared libssl/libcryptocontain text relocations

2002-12-13 Thread Andy Polyakov
appro And even more generally how is it with PIC under Windows appro anyway? Is it an issue? I've gotten the impression so far that PIC isn't an issue in Windows. On the second thought I cam to realize that that form of lea instruction can't be used in PIC... One has to use mov... But

Re: [openssl.org #239] Solaris 2/Intel sharedlibssl/libcryptocontain text relocations

2002-12-13 Thread Andy Polyakov
appro So that if nobody can decline the above paragraph, then the only appro question that is left is if anybody can verify that proposed patch appro doesn't actually break Windows build. Or should I just let the code appro appear in a snapshot? Commit it and let people test snapshots.

Re: [openssl.org #239] Solaris 2/Intelsharedlibssl/libcryptocontain text relocations

2002-12-13 Thread Andy Polyakov
appro But back to the originating ticket. Shall we add that -shared flag to appro gcc command line? What was the consensus? Uhmm, I thought it already did in 0.9.7? If it doesn't, that's a fault in Makefile.org. You have to look at the target do_solaris-shared, and see why

Re: IMPORTANT: please test snapshot openssl-0.9.7-SNAP-20021213

2002-12-14 Thread Andy Polyakov
My solution was to add support for assembly modules. Why do you want to add more rules? Well, I actually fail to understand why can't we have a unified rule? I mean something like this: asm/dx86-elf.o: asm/dx86unix.cpp $(CPP) -DELF asm/sx86unix.cpp | \ sed -e 's/\. /./g'

Re: IMPORTANT: please test snapshot openssl-0.9.7-SNAP-20021213

2002-12-14 Thread Andy Polyakov
The crucial thing to test is that things are still working properly in Windows, especially the DES assembler modules. They been changed to generate PIC code on Unix, and it's important that we get tests on how that affects Windows, if it does. Try openssl-0.9.7-SNAP-20021214 instead as it

Re: Cygwin compilation fails with 0.9.7-stable

2002-12-15 Thread Andy Polyakov
Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker wrote: In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] on Sat, 14 Dec 2002 23:41:00 -0800 (PST), Doug Kaufman [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: dkaufman gcc -o openssl -DMONOLITH -I.. -I../include -DOPENSSL_SYSNAME_CYGWIN32 -DOPENSSL_THREADS -DDSO_WIN32 -DOPENSSL_NO_KRB5

Re: Cygwin compilation fails with 0.9.7-stable

2002-12-15 Thread Andy Polyakov
dkaufman ../libcrypto.a(dx86-out.o)(.text+0x68):des-586.s: undefined reference to `DES_SPtrans' dkaufman ../libcrypto.a(dx86-out.o)(.text+0xf3a):des-586.s: undefined reference to `DES_SPtrans' dkaufman ../libcrypto.a(yx86-out.o)(.text+0x9):crypt586.s: undefined reference to `DES_SPtrans'

Re: [CVS] OpenSSL: openssl Makefile.org

2002-12-15 Thread Andy Polyakov
Whoaa there, how does that change work when the compiler is *not* GNU? It works *perfectly* with vendor compiler! Trust me:-) A. __ OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org Development Mailing List

Re: [CVS] OpenSSL: openssl Makefile.org

2002-12-15 Thread Andy Polyakov
appro Whoaa there, how does that change work when the compiler is *not* GNU? appro appro It works *perfectly* with vendor compiler! Trust me:-) A. Really? They understand -Wl? Yes. Well, I can tell for version 3, but even WorkShop C 4 understands -Wl. There is a whole bunch of compiler

Re: [CVS] OpenSSL: openssl Makefile.org

2002-12-15 Thread Andy Polyakov
appro Whoaa there, how does that change work when the compiler is *not* GNU? appro appro It works *perfectly* with vendor compiler! Trust me:-) A. Really? They understand -Wl? Yes. Well, I can tell for version 3, ^^^ I meant I can *not* tell for for version 3. A.

Re: [CVS] OpenSSL: openssl Makefile.org

2002-12-16 Thread Andy Polyakov
appro Whoaa there, how does that change work when the compiler is *not* GNU? appro appro It works *perfectly* with vendor compiler! Trust me:-) A. Really? They understand -Wl? Yes. Richard, you win but for another reason:-) WorkShop C (as well as other vendor compiler drivers) does

Re: [CVS] OpenSSL: openssl Makefile.org

2002-12-16 Thread Andy Polyakov
appro Richard, you win but for another reason:-) WorkShop C (as well as other appro vendor compiler drivers) does understand -Wl, *but* some of thier appro (Sun's) compiler drivers (well, one of those I have) collect all -Wl appro options in the beginning of ld command line so that ld is

Re: [CVS] OpenSSL: openssl Makefile.org

2002-12-16 Thread Andy Polyakov
Please please please forget about that allextract nonsense. You will*never* get it portable to all desired platforms. The changes being discussed affect Solaris and Solaris only, we're not talking about all desired platforms. Just take the lib*.a and relink it explicitly: mkdir tmp;

Re: OpenSSL port for Win64

2002-12-16 Thread Andy Polyakov
Rich.PurvisI have looked through the email posts and seen the Rich.Purvis patch submitted by John Calcote and the discussion that Rich.Purvis followed, concerning the fact that it doesn't fully Rich.Purvis account as a full port for Win64. I did see that there Rich.Purvis was a Win64

Re: [CVS] OpenSSL: openssl Makefile.shared

2002-12-16 Thread Andy Polyakov
appro 'a=b c=$a; echo $c' doesn't necessarily prints b, I don't understand the first part of that log, Under bash: $ a=b c=$a; echo $c b While under Solaris /bin/sh: $ a=b c=$a; echo $c i.e. it prints nothing. You need a=b; c=$a; echo $c to see b. A.

Re: [CVS] OpenSSL: openssl Makefile.shared

2002-12-16 Thread Andy Polyakov
levitte levitte appro Under bash: levitte appro levitte appro $ a=b c=$a; echo $c levitte appro b levitte appro levitte appro While under Solaris /bin/sh: levitte appro levitte appro $ a=b c=$a; echo $c levitte appro levitte appro i.e. it prints nothing. You need a=b; c=$a; echo $c to

Re: [openssl.org #402] Invalid assembly generated in a.out mode

2002-12-17 Thread Andy Polyakov
__ OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org Development Mailing List [EMAIL PROTECTED] Automated List Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED] ??? At RT page I

Re: [openssl.org #402] Invalid assembly generated in a.out mode

2002-12-17 Thread Andy Polyakov
I have to recommend to always mention which platform is affected. Well, normally I would but I figured that as the bug could be reproduced with a portable perl command would affect any a.out target that the platform was irrelevant... It is relevant as I was unaware of any target that

Re: [openssl.org #405] 0.9.7-beta6 make failure on solaris-x86-gcc

2002-12-18 Thread Andy Polyakov
The fix is committed to cvs repository. If you don't feel like pulling down the cvs tree, apply attached patch, rm crypto/des/asm/*.o and rerun make. The procedure for fetching the patch is - go to http://www.aet.tu-cottbus.de/rt2/ - login as guest:guest - goto ticket 405; - click on download

Re: autoconf'd OpenSSL

2002-12-18 Thread Andy Polyakov
Hi, I've put together an OpenSSL 0.9.6h package using GNU autoconf, available from: http://site.rpi-acm.org/info/openssl/ This is surely great, but I find it unfair/inappropriate that no information whatsoever is provided on - how does the content of this package differs from the

Re: IMPORTANT: please test snapshot openssl-0.9.7-SNAP-20021213

2002-12-23 Thread Andy Polyakov
My solution was to add support for assembly modules. We probably have to postpone this patch to 0.9.7a. If you only could reply more swiftly so that the changes could be exposed in beta... Most improtantly I don't think so! It must be complaining about leal

Re: IMPORTANT: please test snapshot openssl-0.9.7-SNAP-20021213

2002-12-23 Thread Andy Polyakov
appro I can imagine / :/:/, but where do /\. /./ and /@ /@/ some from? Can you appro pinpoint the lines? I mean just give the offending lines' number... Actually, I have no problem seeing that spaces might be added at least around '.' by $(CPP). Some modern C preprocessors do separate

Re: [openssl.org #410] Re: HP-UX build problems with 0.9.6h

2002-12-23 Thread Andy Polyakov
Danm! Double damn! I can't spell damn! Well, it's not like it's appropriate time for that kind of language:-) A. __ OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org Development Mailing List

Re: IMPORTANT: please test snapshot openssl-0.9.7-SNAP-20021213

2002-12-26 Thread Andy Polyakov
tim I've attached a couple of sed man pages. (in case you figure it out first) Hmm, they both refer to ed for regular expressions... They used to have manual pages on-line, but apparently it's moved... Aha! See http://www.caldera.com/support/docs/. No need to bore the whole list with

Re: IMPORTANT: please test snapshot openssl-0.9.7-SNAP-20021213

2002-12-26 Thread Andy Polyakov
appro maybe we should be using perl. appro appro If it ought to be perl, then I'd rather get rid of $(CPP) altogether. In appro which case I'd implement elf-pic perlasm option and simply appro appro asm/dx586-elf.o: asm/dx586-elf.s appro $(CC) $(CFLAGS) -o $@ $ appro appro

Re: IMPORTANT: please test snapshot openssl-0.9.7-SNAP-20021213

2002-12-26 Thread Andy Polyakov
appro appro and make sure perl emits universal code (i.e. no comments:-). Note that appro appro the first rule automatically covers for -b elf of yours:-) appro appro How about reworking that for 0.9.8? Or if you dare, for 0.9.7a? appro appro ??? I already said that I'm holding this

Re: IMPORTANT: please test snapshot openssl-0.9.7-SNAP-20021213

2002-12-26 Thread Andy Polyakov
appro Yet I'd dare:-) If it was up to me and if Tim is with us [i.e. is ready appro to swiftly verify a snapshot on explicit request], I'd pull it [unified appro *586-elf.o rules] even now:-) I have Linux and Solaris/Intel, appro login.openssl.org is a FreeBSD machine... So shall we? I

Re: IMPORTANT: please test snapshot openssl-0.9.7-SNAP-20021213

2002-12-27 Thread Andy Polyakov
tim sco5-gcc FAILS (removing ${x86_elf_asm} should fix this) tim I don't think anyone tries to put gnu ld on tim SCO OpenServer 5. In any case, as far as I see we have two choices for 0.9.7: 1. insert the proposed perl filter (it works as stated, and I feel

Re: IMPORTANT: please test snapshot openssl-0.9.7-SNAP-20021213

2002-12-27 Thread Andy Polyakov
3. Remove ${x86_elf_asm} from sco5-gcc line. This should be done even without any other changes. You'll notice that ${x86_elf_asm} was added to the sco5-gcc line for 0.9.7 and it never worked. ^^^ I see... 4. Replace ${x86_elf_asm} in sco5-gcc rule with

Re: IMPORTANT: please test snapshot openssl-0.9.7-SNAP-20021213

2002-12-27 Thread Andy Polyakov
3. Remove ${x86_elf_asm} from sco5-gcc line. Feels like a wrap-up point for me... I've verified solaris[64]-sparcv9-[g]cc, solaris-x86-gcc, irix[64]-mips3-cc, linux-alpha-[gc]cc, linux-x86_64 and linux-ia64(*) targets. Well, not to mention linux-pentium and FreeBSD-elf... As for DES assembler

Re: Compiling Failed

2002-12-29 Thread Andy Polyakov
VMWare - OpenBSD 3.2 , gcc 2.95.3 Got error when compiling 0.9.7 beta 6: -- gcc -E -DOUT asm/dx86unix.cpp | as -o asm/dx86-out.o des-586.s: Assembler messages: des-586.s:2458: Error: Unimplemented segment type 135296 in

Re: crypto/perlasm/x86unix.pl

2002-12-30 Thread Andy Polyakov
It looks like the PIC changes to crypto/perlasm/x86unix.pl break on non gcc compilers. First of all it's an assembler issue, not compiler. And I don't think it's GNU vs. vendor assembler issue, ... UX:acomp: ERROR: asm/dx86unix.cpp, line 122: invalid input token: 1f UX:acomp: ERROR:

Re: status of support sparc64 on linux

2003-01-03 Thread Andy Polyakov
Ok. the last line in Configure that I've tested is: linux64-sparcv9,... do you want that I test another configuration? I wonder if you could spare some time and test linux-sparcv9 in ftp://ftp.openssl.org/snapshot/openssl-SNAP-20030103.tar.gz or later. There is DES assembler implementation

Re: crypto/perlasm/x86unix.pl

2003-01-06 Thread Andy Polyakov
The cc on UnixWare 2.x doesn't handle -o asm/xx86-elf.o It just creates it in the curent directory. ??? Does it mean that cc driver effectively ignores -o option? Or does it mean that make doesn't pass -o option to cc driver when compiling .s files? If former, does it apply to .s files only?

Re: crypto/perlasm/x86unix.pl

2003-01-07 Thread Andy Polyakov
The cc on UnixWare 2.x doesn't handle -o asm/xx86-elf.o It just creates it in the curent directory. ??? Does it mean that cc driver effectively ignores -o option? Or does it mean that make doesn't pass -o option to cc driver when compiling .s files? If former, does it apply to .s

Re: crypto/perlasm/x86unix.pl

2003-01-08 Thread Andy Polyakov
Options: 1. Move *-elf.[os] one level up, e.g.: dx86-elf.s: asm/des-586.pl ../perlasm/x86asm.pl ../perlasm/cbc.pl (cd asm; $(PERL) des-586.pl elf $(CFLAGS) ../dx86-elf.s) This option didn't work out very well. ... making all in crypto/md5... cc -c

Re: crypto/perlasm/x86unix.pl

2003-01-09 Thread Andy Polyakov
Try out openssl-SNAP-20030109 as it becomes available or 'cvs checkout'. UnixWare 2.x and SCO3 remain without assembler support. If you feel emotionally attached to these two, I'd suggest to trade assembler support for a comment in ./Configure which says that [EMAIL PROTECTED] is the one to talk

Re: [openssl.org #430] segementation fault with openssl 0.9.7

2003-01-09 Thread Andy Polyakov
I've checked in a fix for that and another isssue which should fix things. if (keyfree key) ??? Bitwise and??? Don't you mean (keyfree key)? A. __ OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org

Re: [ANNOUNCE] OpenSSL 0.9.7 released

2003-01-09 Thread Andy Polyakov
However, currently I'm unfortunately unable to release a Cygwin net version of 0.9.7 due to a linker problem, which results in dropped symbols in the link stub library. The most prominent dropped symbol is RC4. Building OpenSSH with this libs results in ssh and sshd crashing immediately

Re: [ANNOUNCE] OpenSSL 0.9.7 released

2003-01-09 Thread Andy Polyakov
What I don't understand is the following. crypto/rc4/Makefile.ssl contains the following: RC4_ENC=rc4_enc.o # or use #RC4_ENC=asm/rx86-elf.o #RC4_ENC=asm/rx86-out.o #RC4_ENC=asm/rx86-sol.o #RC4_ENC=asm/rx86bdsi.o Even though it's supposed to build rc4_enc.o to get the

Re: [ANNOUNCE] OpenSSL 0.9.7 released

2003-01-09 Thread Andy Polyakov
As for .*_end symbols. Apparently there're more... Any particular reason why are you complaining just about .RC4_end? No. Just the one I found first due to the ssh crash. Until I found a solution for that linker problem (which is a linker bug, apparently) I'd like to build the

Re: [ANNOUNCE] OpenSSL 0.9.7 released

2003-01-09 Thread Andy Polyakov
Until I found a solution for that linker problem (which is a linker bug, apparently) I'd like to build the Cygwin version using rc4_enc.o. How can I do that most cleanly? By fixing rx86-out.o:-) A. Did it ever work? Assembler support in cygwin-shared build that is? BN stuff

Re: [ANNOUNCE] OpenSSL 0.9.7 released

2003-01-09 Thread Andy Polyakov
Until I found a solution for that linker problem (which is a linker bug, apparently) I'd like to build the Cygwin version using rc4_enc.o. How can I do that most cleanly? By fixing rx86-out.o:-) A. Did it ever work? Assembler support in cygwin-shared build that is? BN

Re: [ANNOUNCE] OpenSSL 0.9.7 released

2003-01-09 Thread Andy Polyakov
And I don't think it's openssl's fault. Yes, it apparently is... Compile foo(){} with cc -S and note that compiler add some .def ... .endef line, but not perlasm thing which is reponsible for assembler code generation. I'm going to ask some linker experts... Ask about this .def ... .endef

Re: [ANNOUNCE] OpenSSL 0.9.7 released

2003-01-09 Thread Andy Polyakov
And I don't think it's openssl's fault. Yes, it apparently is... Verify that the attached patch solves the problem. I'm going to ask some linker experts... Ask about this .def ... .endef line. Any documentation available on-line? I found the documentation for .def ... .endef, but

Re: [openssl.org #423] openssl-0.9.7-stable-SNAP-20021229: lddproblems

2003-01-10 Thread Andy Polyakov
-- OpenSSL Shared Libraries have been installed in: [directory name] If this directory is not in a standard system path for dynamic/shared libraries, then you will have problems linking and executing applications that

Re: [openssl.org #423] openssl-0.9.7-stable-SNAP-20021229:lddproblems

2003-01-10 Thread Andy Polyakov
Unfortunately, about -R/-rpath, I've avoided it so far for exactly the reason you mentioned: it doesn't quite support moving libraries to a dofferent place and still have it work. And that is what I'm suggesting to adhere to. I.e. to avoid it (and even to remove it from tru64!) and leave this

Re: DJGPP patch for 0.9.7-stable

2003-01-12 Thread Andy Polyakov
dkaufman I noticed that the makefile contains a special line for dkaufman DJGPP, similar to the one for Cygwin. This isn't needed for dkaufman DJGPP. Patch attached. Please explain why .dll loading would be different in that particular case... Because loading of Windows .dll is not an

Re: [ANNOUNCE] OpenSSL 0.9.7 released

2003-01-12 Thread Andy Polyakov
This is a preliminary patch and I need to think it through before I commit it. Maybe we should solve it in some other way (like with ELF). Any DJGPP out there who care to verify if this doesn't break DJGPP? I tried this patch on DJGPP both as normally compiled and also using the asm

Re: [ANNOUNCE] OpenSSL 0.9.7 released

2003-01-12 Thread Andy Polyakov
I tried this patch on DJGPP both as normally compiled and also using the asm modules (put ${x86_out_asm} in the DJGPP config-string ^^^ Oh! I missed that. I mean the fact that they are not actually engaged in the default configuration. Any particular reason why? The

Re: [openssl.org #460] bug_report

2003-01-15 Thread Andy Polyakov
When i am making the openssl-0.9.7 with cc under SCO UNIX5.0.5,the prompt of wrong message is that fatal error: library not found: -lresolv *** Error code 1 (bu21) *** Error code 1 (bu21) How can i do? I am very glad to get

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 #464] TSU NOTIFICATION - encryption

2003-01-18 Thread Andy Polyakov
To summarize. I'm hardcoding i586 to all Caldera/SCO targets. And according to RT#460 we also should get rid of -lresolv on those platforms, right? A. And yes, get rid of -lresolv on the sco5 (OpenServer 5) targets. The question also is if it's needed even in unixware-2.* lines. As

Re: [openssl.org #463] PATCH

2003-01-20 Thread Andy Polyakov
. This didn't crash the program on solaris and linux. But maybe that's too much for the first time. Vladimir -Original Message- From: Andy Polyakov via RT [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, January 20, 2003 2:25 PM To: Shklover, Vladimir Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re

Re: AW: AW: AW: BUG: CreateToolhelp32Snapshot, check if running as NT service

2003-08-11 Thread Andy Polyakov
to make things clear, how to check if a Win32 exe is currently running as a NT service: 1.) Check if the SID (security ID) of the current process is S-1-5-18, i.e. the so called LOCALSYSTEM account. This changes if you configure your service (in the services control panel) to run on a

Re: AW: AW: AW: BUG: CreateToolhelp32Snapshot, check if running as NT service

2003-08-14 Thread Andy Polyakov
There is more reliable way. For example. h = GetProcessWindowStation(); if (h==NULL) fatal error; /* or return runs as service */ if (GetUserObjectInformationW (h,UOI_NAME,NULL,0,NULL,len) || GetLastError() != ERROR_INSUFFICIENT_BUFFER) fatal error; /* or return runs as service

Re: const correctness

1999-03-04 Thread Andy Polyakov
Is there interest in making the library "const correct"? Yes. I have some SSLeay-0.9.0b stuff left. Andy. *** ./crypto/asn1/asn1.h.orig Thu Apr 9 14:11:07 1998 --- ./crypto/asn1/asn1.hThu Jul 16 18:59:18 1998 *** *** 242,248 char *sn,*ln; int nid;

Re: 0.9.2b Sparc problem

1999-03-30 Thread Andy Polyakov
(--num == 0) break; mul_add(rp[3],ap[3],w,c1); if (--num == 0) break; ap+=4; rp+=4; } Cheers. Andy. .ident "bn_asm.sparc.v8plus.S, Version 1.0" .ident "SPARC v9 ISA artwork by Andy Polyakov [EMAIL PROTECTED]" /* * =

Re: 0.9.2b Sparc problem

1999-03-31 Thread Andy Polyakov
O.K. Then I propose deleting (rather then recreating) all those automatically generated assembler versions, with appropriate changes to the configuration script. i don't get it! has anybody read my posts? does it get through at all? well, it must, because i myself get my messages

Re: 0.9.2b Sparc problem

1999-04-01 Thread Andy Polyakov
Hi again! And finally. I slept over it and want you to disregard the following statement of mine: ... It (*) doesn't make any difference to my UltraSPARC-specific implementation (as I exploit branches on register condition with prediction) ... (*) unrolling loops in below way because

LP64: blowfish woes

1999-04-19 Thread Andy Polyakov
Hi! Following is far from what I'd consider as a good programming practice... First a trivial table everybody would recognize: Intel,SPARCv8,MIPS 32 Alpha,SPARCv9,MIPS 64 sizeof(int) 4 4 sizeof(long)4 8

Re: RC5 in OpenSSL 3 times slower than SSLeay ?!?!

1999-04-19 Thread Andy Polyakov
performance has dropped by a factor of 2.5 ... 4!!! Did you use the same compiler flags for both builds? Yes, of course! but on which platform? which compiler? a. __ OpenSSL Project

Re: 0.9.2b Sparc problem

1999-04-19 Thread Andy Polyakov
. If there actually *are* UltraLinux people out there *really* interested in this, contact me and we'll see... Cheers. Andy. .ident "bn_asm.sparc.v8plus.S, Version 1.2" .ident "SPARC v8plus ISA artwork by Andy Polyakov [

Re: LP64: blowfish woes

1999-04-20 Thread Andy Polyakov
Hello again! I wrote: #elif defined(BF_PTR) /* This is normally very good */ #define BF_ENC(LL,R,S,P) \ LL^=P; \ LL^= (((*(BF_LONG *)((unsigned char *)(S[ 0])+((RBF_0)BF_M))+ \ *(BF_LONG *)((unsigned char *)(S[256])+((RBF_1)BF_M)))^ \

Solaris 7/64 config line

1999-04-20 Thread Andy Polyakov
Hi! For those who dare:-) With all my "LP64 woes" patches applied drop following into Configure and experience the power of 64 bits computing with UltraSPARC. "solaris64-usparc-cc","cc:-xtarget=ultra -xarch=v9 -Xa -xO5 -xdepend -xstrconst -DB_ENDIAN:\ -lsocket -lnsl:\

Re: LP64: blowfish woes

1999-04-21 Thread Andy Polyakov
#if !defined(BF_PTR) !defined(BF_PTR2) #define BF_PTR #endif i.e. the comment is effectively *disregarded*, isn't it? This is autogenerated in Configure. Oops! I suppose I owe an apology for my comment following the quoted string then. I apologize and I'm sorry! BUT! Even after

Re: LP64: blowfish woes

1999-04-22 Thread Andy Polyakov
On the other hand! Does the library actually *compile* under MS-DOS/WIN16? Does *anybody* actually use it? I think Steve still builds Win16 versions. No I don't. Win16 is too painful but when dropping support was mentioned a while ago someone mentioned various applications that used

Re: LP64: sha woes

1999-04-22 Thread Andy Polyakov
This has been documented in some stage: *dont* define B_ENDIAN or L_ENDIAN on the 64-bit platforms.. Where? In either case here is an example proving opposite. From crypto/evp/bio_ok.c: #ifndef L_ENDIAN #define swapem(x) \ ((unsigned long int)unsigned long int)(x) 0x00ffU)

Intel: blowfish performance

1999-04-23 Thread Andy Polyakov
Hi! I do realize that I'm concentrating on wrong matters (after all, blowfish is never used by SSL applications), but I couldn't abstain from commenting:-) First of I fail to understand why #define BF_PTR2 would perform better than the last "generic" version. The one that performs best on Alpha:

Re: LP64: blowfish woes

1999-04-27 Thread Andy Polyakov
crypto/opensslconf.h.in by Ulf). I don't see any need for it, so I've folded the whole mumbo-jumbo to #undef BF_PTR:-) If BF_PTR should normally not be defined, we can simply remove it from opensslconf.h and the Configure script. Is that what you mean? NO! That's defintely *NOT* what I

Re: list of supported platforms

1999-04-28 Thread Andy Polyakov
Failure: === IRIX 6.5.3m [2] [2] bignum code is broken. I get through bntest and rsa_oaep_test, but not through exptest. BN_mod_exp_recp is the one that breaks... Andy. __ OpenSSL Project

Re: LP64: sha woes

1999-04-29 Thread Andy Polyakov
Hello, guys! The other angle that comes to mind is if there are machines where "unsigned int" is 64 bits. Seems like Cray's are that way. Will the code still work on such a machine? Find attached patch relative to openssl-SNAP-19990421 snapshot. This is my "final" proposal:-) Well, I call

  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >