Re: [Openvpn-devel] could be gitlab-ci an alternative to buildbot cloud?

Hi, On Sun, Mar 05, 2017 at 02:42:49PM +, ?? wrote: > as for test agents, I assume those are dedicated servers, with no other > applications. risk of root access > is not high Maintenance of throwaway systems (read: full re-image after every test run) is too high for me

[Openvpn-devel] [PATCH] travis-ci: remove unused files

Those files were commited by mistake. I implemented building dependencies in 4 separate scripts, later Steffan Karger combined all 4 scripts into "build-deps.sh". Signed-off-by: Ilya Shipitsin --- .travis/build-mbedtls-linux.sh | 9 - .travis/build-mbedtls-osx.sh

Re: [Openvpn-devel] could be gitlab-ci an alternative to buildbot cloud?

Вс, 5 марта 2017 г. в 19:37, Steffan Karger : > Hi, > > On 05-03-17 15:25, Илья Шипицин wrote: > > there was some buzz related to improvement of testing system, like > > patchwork. > > we tried gitlab-ci on our internal project, it looks very promising. > > > > since openvpn is

Re: [Openvpn-devel] could be gitlab-ci an alternative to buildbot cloud?

Hi, On 05-03-17 15:25, Илья Шипицин wrote: > there was some buzz related to improvement of testing system, like > patchwork. > we tried gitlab-ci on our internal project, it looks very promising. > > since openvpn is already hosted on gitlab.com , > there's a possibility of >

[Openvpn-devel] could be gitlab-ci an alternative to buildbot cloud?

Hello, there was some buzz related to improvement of testing system, like patchwork. we tried gitlab-ci on our internal project, it looks very promising. since openvpn is already hosted on gitlab.com, there's a possibility of 1) users can add their own gitlab-ci agents to the repo 2) it might

[Openvpn-devel] [PATCH applied] Re: travis-ci: add 'make distcheck' to test scenario, V2

Your patch has been applied to the master branch. commit 56e6bd8967d72c4374389dfd5cf32f5e3b86242c Author: Ilya Shipitsin Date: Sat Feb 25 23:00:04 2017 +0500 travis-ci: add 'make distcheck' to test scenario, V2 Signed-off-by: Ilya Shipitsin Acked-by:

Re: [Openvpn-devel] [PATCH applied] Re: OpenSSL: don't use direct access to the internal of RSA_METHOD

Hi, On Sun, Mar 05, 2017 at 01:08:09PM +0100, Emmanuel Deloget wrote: > I don't like it much either but I cannot think of a better solution. I haven't said that I don't *like* it :-) - I came across it when doing a "post commit sanity check" and assumed that there are good reasons. Just

[Openvpn-devel] [PATCH applied] Re: OpenSSL: SSLeay symbols are no longer available in OpenSSL 1.1

Your patch has been applied to the master and release/2.4 branch. commit c828ffc648eebda20e2f9087248944fa0f52a582 (master) commit d702b2539d43a3326d76cc1764fedf237fc6744f (release/2.4) Author: Emmanuel Deloget Date: Fri Feb 17 23:00:52 2017 +0100 OpenSSL: SSLeay symbols are no longer

[Openvpn-devel] [PATCH applied] Re: OpenSSL: use EVP_CipherInit_ex() instead of EVP_CipherInit()

Your patch has been applied to the master and release/2.4 branch. commit 8d00afae88b626c9cf14170a943b33a7ed378070 (master) commit 0fa3df510c10820d00b8f5c77a8730f90189f30d (release/2.4) Author: Emmanuel Deloget Date: Mon Feb 20 15:32:34 2017 +0100 OpenSSL: use EVP_CipherInit_ex() instead

Re: [Openvpn-devel] [PATCH applied] Re: OpenSSL: don't use direct access to the internal of RSA_METHOD

Hi, On Sun, Mar 5, 2017 at 11:29 AM, Steffan Karger wrote: > > On 05-03-17 10:53, Gert Doering wrote: >> Small side note: I assume that RSA_meth_new() can fail and return NULL >> in OpenSSL 1.1? Because for 1.0, the "check_malloc_return(rsa_meth)" call >> isn't necessary, as

Re: [Openvpn-devel] [PATCH applied] Re: OpenSSL: don't use direct access to the internal of RSA_METHOD

On 05-03-17 10:53, Gert Doering wrote: > Small side note: I assume that RSA_meth_new() can fail and return NULL > in OpenSSL 1.1? Because for 1.0, the "check_malloc_return(rsa_meth)" call > isn't necessary, as ALLOC_OBJ_CLEAR() would call ALLOC_OBJ() and that > already checks... (mentioning

[Openvpn-devel] [PATCH applied] Re: OpenSSL: don't use direct access to the internal of RSA_METHOD

Your patch (v3) has been applied to the master and release/2.4 branch. Small side note: I assume that RSA_meth_new() can fail and return NULL in OpenSSL 1.1? Because for 1.0, the "check_malloc_return(rsa_meth)" call isn't necessary, as ALLOC_OBJ_CLEAR() would call ALLOC_OBJ() and that already