On 5/28/24 08:51, Tomas Mraz wrote:
The OpenSSL project team would like to announce the upcoming release of
OpenSSL versions 3.3.1, 3.2.2, 3.1.6 and 3.0.14.
Will there be any release candidate tarballs for testing on various
systems? Perhaps there already exists some commit or "tag" (
On 5/16/24 08:28, Neil Horman wrote:
Glad its working a bit better for you. If you are inclined, please feel
free to open a PR with your changes for review.
Well, the changes are *really* trivial. Necessary and trivial.
--
Dennis Clarke
RISC-V/SPARC/PPC/ARM/CISC
UNIX and Linux spoken
On 5/15/24 18:34, Neil Horman wrote:
You are correct, the files you reference (most of them in fact) get built
into separate objects in the event the build flags are different for shared
and static libraries, and should be unrelated to the issue you are seeing
I was somewhat puzzled by
On 5/13/24 03:34, Matt Caswell wrote:
On 13/05/2024 02:42, Neil Horman wrote:
We added support for RCU locks in 3.3 which required the use of
atomics (or emulated atomic where they couldn't be supported), but
those were in libcrypro not liberal
Right - its supposed to fallback to
On 5/12/24 21:42, Neil Horman wrote:
We added support for RCU locks in 3.3 which required the use of atomics (or
emulated atomic where they couldn't be supported), but those were in
libcrypro not liberal
I see. I am having great difficulty with 3.3 on an old Sun SPARC64
server where there
On 4/9/24 08:56, OpenSSL wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
OpenSSL version 3.3.0 released
==
Trying to compile this on an old Solaris 10 machine and over and over
and over I see these strange things as Undefined symbols :
On 11/2/22 18:29, Michael Wojcik via openssl-users wrote:
From: openssl-users On Behalf Of Phillip
Susi
Sent: Wednesday, 2 November, 2022 11:45
The only thing to fix is don't put your compiler in strict C90 mode.
I'm inclined to agree. While there's an argument for backward compatibility,
On 11/2/22 07:30, Tomas Mraz wrote:
No, long long and unsigned long long is required and it was required
for quite some time. The code is mostly C90 but not strictly.
I suppose on platforms with 64bit long type we could make it work
without long long though. Pull requests are welcome.
Tomas
Good day :
This always bites me when I try strict C90 :
In file included from include/openssl/x509.h:41,
from apps/include/apps.h:29,
from apps/lib/app_libctx.c:10:
include/openssl/sha.h:106:37: error: ISO C90 does not support 'long
long' [-Wlong-long]
On 6/14/22 08:03, Ing. Martin Koci, MBA wrote:
Hello,
The OpenSSL project team would like to announce the forthcoming
release of OpenSSL versions 3.0.4, 1.1.1p.
These releases will be made available on Tuesday 21st June 2022
between 1300-1700 UTC.
These are security-fix releases. The highest
On 6/10/22 03:48, Matt Caswell wrote:
On 09/06/2022 21:13, Dennis Clarke via openssl-users wrote:
On 6/9/22 15:33, Dmitry Belyavsky wrote:
It happens because of certificates expiration. Try applying the patch
from
https://github.com/openssl/openssl/pull/18444
Oh cool. Thank you. Sadly I
On 6/9/22 16:13, Dennis Clarke via openssl-users wrote:
On 6/9/22 15:33, Dmitry Belyavsky wrote:
It happens because of certificates expiration. Try applying the patch
from
https://github.com/openssl/openssl/pull/18444
Oh cool. Thank you. Sadly I do not see a patch file there.
Do you mean
On 6/9/22 15:33, Dmitry Belyavsky wrote:
It happens because of certificates expiration. Try applying the patch from
https://github.com/openssl/openssl/pull/18444
Oh cool. Thank you. Sadly I do not see a patch file there.
Do you mean this ?
On 6/9/22 13:48, Dennis Clarke via openssl-users wrote:
On 6/9/22 13:24, Dennis Clarke via openssl-users wrote:
* baffled *
Merely a self-reply here : out of the box and with nothing in the
10-main.conf the software compiles. I see no standards spec and there
are other things I would
On 6/9/22 13:24, Dennis Clarke via openssl-users wrote:
* baffled *
Merely a self-reply here : out of the box and with nothing in the
10-main.conf the software compiles. I see no standards spec and there
are other things I would like to see but for now the out of the box
stuff sseems
* baffled *
After many many various incantations and a few coffee I can not get past
this strange nested pile of ifdef's to allow usleep() to exist :
make depend && make _build_sw
make[1]: Entering directory `/opt/bw/build/openssl-3.0.3_rhel6_amd64.004'
make[1]: Leaving directory
This is slightly better than the beta release :
Test Summary Report
---
03-test_internal_modes.t (Wstat: 256 Tests: 1 Failed: 1)
Failed test: 1
Non-zero exit status: 1
90-test_ige.t(Wstat: 256 Tests: 1 Failed: 1)
Failed test: 1
Non-zero exit
Merely an FYI that all seems to be working well. There are a few tests
that fail and they are the same ones I saw in the beta releases.
I can follow up with details later but for now I am curious what the
directory "lib/engines-3" is for ? I get that as an empty directory
and my configuration
On 8/12/21 10:11, Matt Caswell wrote:
>
>
> On 12/08/2021 01:35, Dennis Clarke via openssl-users wrote:
>> On 8/5/21 00:55, Dr Paul Dale wrote:
>>> Dennis,
>>>
>>> Thanks for the information. Solaris and z/OS are not tested by the
>>> pro
On 8/5/21 00:55, Dr Paul Dale wrote:
> Dennis,
>
> Thanks for the information. Solaris and z/OS are not tested by the
> project, so it's good to know they aren't too far from working out of
> the box.
>
> We would definitely be interested in a pull request with your fixes at
> some stage --
>From another thread :
>
> The OpenSSL team has wondered how many people were trying out 3.0
> during the beta period without any way of knowing for sure.
>
If your curious about the old legacy Solaris 10 on reasonably new
Fujitsu SPARC64 then I can tell you nearly everything "just works".
After a pile of tweaks here and there as well as EVERY perl file needed
to be slightly touched I was able to get a clean compile and a
reasonable result ( for a beta1 ) from the testsuite :
( SRCTOP=. \
BLDTOP=. \
PERL="/opt/bw/bin/perl" \
On 7/25/21 20:16, Dr Paul Dale wrote:
> None of the core developers have access to Solaris machines, thus we
> rely on the community for reports and fixes for this kind of thing.
Well access can be easily arranged.
> We're happy to assist and can sometimes identify and fix the problem but
> we
After some work to clean out previous versions of OpenSSL 1.1.1x for
some x I was able to get 3.0.0 beta1 to build. However it looks like
some horrific perl problem in the test harness :
#
--
# Failed test 'Name
I am not sure what testing is happening with old Solaris 10 but I can
tell you there are still servers out there running. I had no issues with
the configuration stage but, as usual, I do need to make a few tweaks to
Configurations/10-main.conf. Merely to get a consistent set of CFLAGS
that I use
> No, but show us your ./Configure line.
> I regularly build into other directories.
>
> For instance:
> ./Configure --prefix=/sandel/3rd/openssl-dtls-api linux-x86_64
>
Thank you for the reply. I did go looking into the resultant Makefile
and there I did see that the "--prefix=/opt/foo" is
This is a strange error to get on Debian sid amd64 :
/usr/bin/gcc-10 -I. -Iinclude -fPIC -pthread -std=iso9899:1999 -m64 -g
-O0 -march=k8 -mtune=k8 -Wl,-rpath=/opt/bw/lib,--enable-new-dtags
-fno-builtin -malign-double -mpc80 -std=iso9899:1999 -m64 -g -O0
-march=k8 -mtune=k8
I have been trying to build a debug version with no-asm into a /opt/foo
directory but I always see :
-DOPENSSLDIR="\"/usr/local/ssl\""
and
-DENGINESDIR="\"/usr/local/lib/engines-1.1\""
during the compile.
Are these hard coded in somewhere ?
--
Dennis Clarke
On 2020-04-21 18:45, Michael Tuexen wrote:
On 21. Apr 2020, at 23:49, Matt Caswell wrote:
On 21/04/2020 18:34, Claus Assmann wrote:
Thanks for the reply, below is the output, It seems it only fails
because the host doesn't support IPv6?
Yes - it does seem to be an IPv6 problem. I don't
29 matches
Mail list logo
