> -Original Message-
> From: owner-openssl-us...@openssl.org
> [mailto:owner-openssl-us...@openssl.org] On Behalf Of sa...@zxid.org
> Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2012 10:13 AM
> To: st...@openssl.org; r...@openssl.org
> Cc: openssl-users@openssl.org; sa...@zxid.org
> Subject:
l.org]
On Behalf Of sa...@zxid.org
Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2012 10:13 AM
To: st...@openssl.org; r...@openssl.org
Cc: openssl-users@openssl.org; sa...@zxid.org
Subject: Re: libs version are 1.0.0 after compiling openssl 1.0.1c
"Dr. Stephen Henson" said:
> On Tue, Sep 25, 2012
"Dr. Stephen Henson" said:
> On Tue, Sep 25, 2012, Thakur, Praveen Kumar wrote:
>
> > I don't see any issue if .so files extension is 1.0.0. However, I wanted to
> > confirm that is this a defect with 1.0.1 release? Or am I missing something.
>
> The 1.0.1 release should be binary compatible wi
On Tue, Sep 25, 2012, Thakur, Praveen Kumar wrote:
> I don't see any issue if .so files extension is 1.0.0. However, I wanted to
> confirm that is this a defect with 1.0.1 release? Or am I missing something.
The 1.0.1 release should be binary compatible with 1.0.0, any discrepancies
should be fi
is this a defect with 1.0.1 release? Or am I missing something.
> Thanks,
> Praveen
> From: owner-openssl-us...@openssl.org
> [mailto:owner-openssl-us...@openssl.org] On Behalf Of karthik kondlada
> Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2012 7:09 PM
> To: openssl-users@openssl.org
>
gt;
> *From:* owner-openssl-us...@openssl.org [mailto:
> owner-openssl-us...@openssl.org] *On Behalf Of *karthik kondlada
> *Sent:* Tuesday, September 25, 2012 7:09 PM
> *To:* openssl-users@openssl.org
> *Subject:* Re: libs version are 1.0.0 after compiling openssl 1.0.1c
>
> ** **
esday, September 25, 2012 7:09 PM
To: openssl-users@openssl.org
Subject: Re: libs version are 1.0.0 after compiling openssl 1.0.1c
Hi Praveen,
In linux you would expect extension to so files as such you
have received. I think when we use system.loadlibrary method will get errors so
Hi Praveen,
In linux you would expect extension to so files as such
you have received. I think when we use system.loadlibrary method will get
errors so have to execute using system.load method.
Regards,
kondlada
On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 10:23 AM, Thakur, Praveen Kumar <
praveenk
Hi,
I have compiled OpenSSL 1.0.1c. After compilation libs which are generated
contains version number as 1.0.0.
For example: libssl.so.1.0.0, libcrypto.so.1.0.0
Is this a defect with OpenSSL 1.0.1c? Ideally library names should have been
libssl.so.1.0.1, libcrypto.so.1.0.1
Thanks,
Praveen
