Thanks :) That was the problem! Very interesting. I didn't think
order mattered :)
I reordered it and it worked.
J
On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 5:30 PM, Wim Lewis wrote:
>
> On 28 Feb 2012, at 5:15 PM, JonathonS wrote:
>> Thanks guys. Sorry for the confusion. I thought "U" meant undefined
>> and
When can we expect the final release of OpenSSL 1.0.1?
Does FIPS 2.0 only work with OpenSSL 1.0.1 but not 1.0.0?
There is a document,
http://csrc.nist.gov/groups/STM/cmvp/documents/140-1/140InProcess.pdf, of
pending FIPS certificate and OpenSSL object module is there.
Is that for FIPS 2.0? When
On 28 Feb 2012, at 5:15 PM, JonathonS wrote:
> Thanks guys. Sorry for the confusion. I thought "U" meant undefined
> and "T" meant it *belongs* in the text section, NOT that it actually
> *exists* in the text section :)
>
> Here is my linker command.
>
> g++ -g -o unit_tests unit_tests.o -L/hom
Thanks guys. Sorry for the confusion. I thought "U" meant undefined
and "T" meant it *belongs* in the text section, NOT that it actually
*exists* in the text section :)
Here is my linker command.
g++ -g -o unit_tests unit_tests.o -L/home/user/build/openssl/debug/lib
-lcrypto -lssl --L/home/user/
Security Update for Windows Server 2008 R2 x 64 Edition (KB2585542)
http://www.microsoft.com/download/en/details.aspx?displaylang=en&id=28629
Does anybody have any experience with this security patch?
It seems to affect older versions of openssl (0.9.7 or so)... does anybody have
experience wi
> From: JonathonS [mailto:thejunk...@gmail.com]
>
> Thanks guys for all your help.
>
> I am using 64-bit linux Centos. The binaries were built with GCC
> 4.4.4.
>
> I am not currently linking against libcurl. I am just linking against
> my own project. I am pretty sure the cause of the proble
Thanks guys for all your help.
I am using 64-bit linux Centos. The binaries were built with GCC 4.4.4.
I am not currently linking against libcurl. I am just linking against
my own project. I am pretty sure the cause of the problem is that the
symbols are not defined in the binaries produced.
I'm noticing the version number of the SSL and crypto libraries are showing
1.0.0, but I expected 1.0.1. I can see the statement SHLIB_MINOR in the
Makefile that sets it, and it seems on purpose, but I want to make sure.
Snippet from Makefile at the top level, beginning at line 7, through line
On 28 Feb 2012, at 9:57 AM, JonathonS wrote:
> Here is the command I used to build openssl:
>
> ./Configure --prefix=/home/user/openssl_release
> --openssldir=/home/user/openssl_release no-asm threads zlib shared
> linux-x86_64
>
> After the binaries have been built, it produces libcrypto.a and
> From: JonathonS [mailto:thejunk...@gmail.com]
>
> I am building openssl as a static library, and when I link to it, I am
> getting a bunch of missing symbols that *should* be defined by
> openssl.
>
> Here is the command I used to build openssl:
>
> ./Configure --prefix=/home/user/openssl_rele
On Tue February 28 2012, JonathonS wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I am building openssl as a static library, and when I link to it, I am
> getting a bunch of missing symbols that *should* be defined by
> openssl.
>
> Here is the command I used to build openssl:
>
> ./Configure --prefix=/home/user/openssl_
Hi all,
I am building openssl as a static library, and when I link to it, I am
getting a bunch of missing symbols that *should* be defined by
openssl.
Here is the command I used to build openssl:
./Configure --prefix=/home/user/openssl_release
--openssldir=/home/user/openssl_release no-asm threa
12 matches
Mail list logo
