Hi,
> On Wed, 4 Mar 2020 22:26:32 +0700
> Eugene Grosbein said:
> No, I never do r515574 back. The other ports depending upon
> cyrus-sasl2 must be linked same version of openssl. So, there is an
> option "DEFAULT_VERSIONS= ssl=base". Your hack breaks this premise and
> confuse
04.03.2020 21:43, Hajimu UMEMOTO wrote:
> Hi,
>
>> On Wed, 4 Mar 2020 21:07:10 +0700
>> Eugene Grosbein said:
>
> eugen> Dear maintainer, please consider applying r515574 back.
>
> No, I never do r515574 back. The other ports depending upon
> cyrus-sasl2 must be linked same version of
Hi,
> On Wed, 4 Mar 2020 21:07:10 +0700
> Eugene Grosbein said:
eugen> Dear maintainer, please consider applying r515574 back.
No, I never do r515574 back. The other ports depending upon
cyrus-sasl2 must be linked same version of openssl. So, there is an
option "DEFAULT_VERSIONS=
On 20. 3. 4., Eugene Grosbein wrote:
> 04.03.2020 0:10, John Baldwin wrote:
>
>> When the handbook text was first written we didn't have an OpenSSL in ports
>> that would conflict
>
> Thank you very much for this key for solving the problem.
> This occured to be missing bit of information I was
04.03.2020 0:10, John Baldwin wrote:
> When the handbook text was first written we didn't have an OpenSSL in ports
> that would conflict
Thank you very much for this key for solving the problem.
This occured to be missing bit of information I was looking for.
So, the fix is simple. We need
04.03.2020 0:10, John Baldwin wrote:
> On 3/3/20 6:56 AM, Eugene Grosbein wrote:
>> 03.03.2020 21:44, Jung-uk Kim wrote:
>>
>>> No, you'll have the same linker failure.
>>
>> Then what's the reason of the failure? We have to fix it for stable/11
>> users, too.
>
> It can't be fixed, and even if
On 3/3/20 6:56 AM, Eugene Grosbein wrote:
> 03.03.2020 21:44, Jung-uk Kim wrote:
>
>> No, you'll have the same linker failure.
>
> Then what's the reason of the failure? We have to fix it for stable/11 users,
> too.
It can't be fixed, and even if you are on stable/12, it would be
a problem if
On 3/3/20 6:48 AM, Cy Schubert wrote:
> On March 2, 2020 2:50:47 PM PST, Hiroki Sato wrote:
>> Jung-uk Kim wrote
>> in <8e60a869-fe1e-9314-ffdc-76ed3e2dc...@freebsd.org>:
>>
>> jk> > I merely try to understand how to unbreak upgrade path for
>> 11.2-STABLE workstations
>> jk> > with stock
On March 2, 2020 2:50:47 PM PST, Hiroki Sato wrote:
>Jung-uk Kim wrote
> in <8e60a869-fe1e-9314-ffdc-76ed3e2dc...@freebsd.org>:
>
>jk> > I merely try to understand how to unbreak upgrade path for
>11.2-STABLE workstations
>jk> > with stock sendmail and SSL support that also has many ports
03.03.2020 21:44, Jung-uk Kim wrote:
> No, you'll have the same linker failure.
Then what's the reason of the failure? We have to fix it for stable/11 users,
too.
___
svn-src-head@freebsd.org mailing list
On 20. 3. 3., Eugene Grosbein wrote:
> 03.03.2020 21:06, Jung-uk Kim wrote:
>
b) If you have security/openssl, sendmail in the base system does not
support SMTP AUTH because of incompatibility with the newer
versions of OpenSSL. Use mail/sendmail from ports.
I
03.03.2020 21:06, Jung-uk Kim wrote:
>>> b) If you have security/openssl, sendmail in the base system does not
>>> support SMTP AUTH because of incompatibility with the newer
>>> versions of OpenSSL. Use mail/sendmail from ports.
>>>
>>> I still feel that b) is sub-optimal, but it
On 20. 3. 3., Eugene Grosbein wrote:
> 03.03.2020 5:50, Hiroki Sato wrote:
>
>> b) If you have security/openssl, sendmail in the base system does not
>> support SMTP AUTH because of incompatibility with the newer
>> versions of OpenSSL. Use mail/sendmail from ports.
>>
>> I still feel
03.03.2020 5:50, Hiroki Sato wrote:
> b) If you have security/openssl, sendmail in the base system does not
> support SMTP AUTH because of incompatibility with the newer
> versions of OpenSSL. Use mail/sendmail from ports.
>
> I still feel that b) is sub-optimal, but it would be too
On 20. 3. 2., Hiroki Sato wrote:
> Jung-uk Kim wrote
> in <8e60a869-fe1e-9314-ffdc-76ed3e2dc...@freebsd.org>:
>
> jk> > I merely try to understand how to unbreak upgrade path for 11.2-STABLE
> workstations
> jk> > with stock sendmail and SSL support that also has many ports installed
>
Jung-uk Kim wrote
in <8e60a869-fe1e-9314-ffdc-76ed3e2dc...@freebsd.org>:
jk> > I merely try to understand how to unbreak upgrade path for 11.2-STABLE
workstations
jk> > with stock sendmail and SSL support that also has many ports installed
including
jk> > ports requiring new openssl API.
On 20. 3. 2., Eugene Grosbein wrote:
> 03.03.2020 4:13, Jung-uk Kim wrote:
>
>> On 20. 3. 2., Eugene Grosbein wrote:
>>> 02.03.2020 21:29, Jung-uk Kim wrote:
>>>
>> You can easily repeat the problem using recent ports tree and
>> recent stable/11 and handbook-recommended way.
>
>
03.03.2020 4:13, Jung-uk Kim wrote:
> On 20. 3. 2., Eugene Grosbein wrote:
>> 02.03.2020 21:29, Jung-uk Kim wrote:
>>
> You can easily repeat the problem using recent ports tree and
> recent stable/11 and handbook-recommended way.
Mixing base and ports OpenSSLs is a bad idea.
On 20. 3. 2., Eugene Grosbein wrote:
> 02.03.2020 21:29, Jung-uk Kim wrote:
>
You can easily repeat the problem using recent ports tree and
recent stable/11 and handbook-recommended way.
>>>
>>> Mixing base and ports OpenSSLs is a bad idea. If you decided to
>>> build some ports with
02.03.2020 21:29, Jung-uk Kim wrote:
>>> You can easily repeat the problem using recent ports tree and
>>> recent stable/11 and handbook-recommended way.
>>
>> Mixing base and ports OpenSSLs is a bad idea. If you decided to
>> build some ports with ports OpenSSL for some reason, every ports
>>
On 20. 3. 2., Jung-uk Kim wrote:
> On 20. 3. 1., Eugene Grosbein wrote:
>> 01.03.2020 22:20, Hajimu UMEMOTO wrote:
>>
On Sun, 1 Mar 2020 21:57:35 +0700 Eugene Grosbein
said:
>>>
>>> eugen> One more time: these days it is not possible to upgrade
>>> 11.2-STABLE system to recent
On 20. 3. 1., Eugene Grosbein wrote:
> 01.03.2020 22:20, Hajimu UMEMOTO wrote:
>
>>> On Sun, 1 Mar 2020 21:57:35 +0700
>>> Eugene Grosbein said:
>>
>> eugen> One more time: these days it is not possible to upgrade 11.2-STABLE
>> system to recent stable/11
>> eugen> with stock sendmail
02.03.2020 3:46, Ian Lepore wrote:
> On Mon, 2020-03-02 at 03:39 +0700, Eugene Grosbein wrote:
>> 02.03.2020 3:07, Ian Lepore wrote:
>>
You can easily repeat the problem using recent ports tree and
recent
stable/11 and handbook-recommended way.
>>>
>>> And why can't you use
On Mon, 2020-03-02 at 03:39 +0700, Eugene Grosbein wrote:
> 02.03.2020 3:07, Ian Lepore wrote:
>
> > > You can easily repeat the problem using recent ports tree and
> > > recent
> > > stable/11 and handbook-recommended way.
> > >
> >
> > And why can't you use the mail/sendmail port with the SSL
02.03.2020 3:07, Ian Lepore wrote:
>> You can easily repeat the problem using recent ports tree and recent
>> stable/11 and handbook-recommended way.
>>
>
> And why can't you use the mail/sendmail port with the SSL options set
> the same as for other ports?
That's not about possible
On Mon, 2020-03-02 at 02:46 +0700, Eugene Grosbein wrote:
> 01.03.2020 22:20, Hajimu UMEMOTO wrote:
>
> > > > > > > On Sun, 1 Mar 2020 21:57:35 +0700
> > > > > > > Eugene Grosbein said:
> >
> > eugen> One more time: these days it is not possible to upgrade
> > 11.2-STABLE system to recent
01.03.2020 22:20, Hajimu UMEMOTO wrote:
>> On Sun, 1 Mar 2020 21:57:35 +0700
>> Eugene Grosbein said:
>
> eugen> One more time: these days it is not possible to upgrade 11.2-STABLE
> system to recent stable/11
> eugen> with stock sendmail and SSL/SASL support if the system has ports
Hi,
> On Sun, 1 Mar 2020 21:57:35 +0700
> Eugene Grosbein said:
eugen> One more time: these days it is not possible to upgrade 11.2-STABLE
system to recent stable/11
eugen> with stock sendmail and SSL/SASL support if the system has ports that
need openssl-1.1.1,
If you wish to use
29.02.2020 11:05, Hajimu UMEMOTO пишет:
> Hi,
>
>> On Sat, 29 Feb 2020 10:34:28 +0700
>> Eugene Grosbein said:
>
> eugen> Base openssl uses 1.1.x API in stable/12, so it does not conflict with
> SASL2 from ports using same API.
> eugen> Base openssl uses 1.0.2 API in stable/11, so it
Hi,
> On Sat, 29 Feb 2020 10:34:28 +0700
> Eugene Grosbein said:
eugen> Base openssl uses 1.1.x API in stable/12, so it does not conflict with
SASL2 from ports using same API.
eugen> Base openssl uses 1.0.2 API in stable/11, so it conflicts with SASL2
from ports using 1.1.1 SSL API
29.02.2020 0:34, Hajimu UMEMOTO wrote:
> jkim> All you have to do is rebuilding security/cyrus-sasl2 with system
> jkim> OpenSSL, i.e., disable SSL option.
>
> Perhaps, you mean:
>
> DEFAULT_VERSIONS= ssl=base
>
> I'm using base sendmail with cyrus-sasl2 quite well on 12-STABLE.
>
> %
29.02.2020 1:13, Jung-uk Kim wrote:
> On 20. 2. 28., Eugene Grosbein wrote:
>> 28.02.2020 23:01, Jung-uk Kim wrote:
>>
Now I believe the only option is merge of new 1.1.1 SSL API to our
sendmail.
>>>
>>> No, stable/11 will never be updated to OpenSSL 1.1.1 because of ABI
>>>
On 20. 2. 28., Eugene Grosbein wrote:
> 28.02.2020 23:01, Jung-uk Kim wrote:
>
>>> Now I believe the only option is merge of new 1.1.1 SSL API to our sendmail.
>>
>> No, stable/11 will never be updated to OpenSSL 1.1.1 because of ABI
>> incompatibility.
>
> I'm not talking about upgrading base
Hi,
> On Fri, 28 Feb 2020 10:21:41 -0500
> Jung-uk Kim said:
jkim> All you have to do is rebuilding security/cyrus-sasl2 with system
jkim> OpenSSL, i.e., disable SSL option.
Perhaps, you mean:
DEFAULT_VERSIONS= ssl=base
I'm using base sendmail with cyrus-sasl2 quite well on
28.02.2020 23:01, Jung-uk Kim wrote:
>> Now I believe the only option is merge of new 1.1.1 SSL API to our sendmail.
>
> No, stable/11 will never be updated to OpenSSL 1.1.1 because of ABI
> incompatibility.
I'm not talking about upgrading base system OpenSSL to 1.1.1 in stable/11.
I'm talking
On 20. 2. 28., Eugene Grosbein wrote:
> 28.02.2020 22:33, Jung-uk Kim wrote:
>
>>> All you have to do is rebuilding security/cyrus-sasl2 with system
>>> OpenSSL, i.e., disable SSL option.
>>
>> I just found that you added the option. X-)
>>
>> The option is quite misleading. You need to fix the
28.02.2020 22:33, Jung-uk Kim wrote:
>> All you have to do is rebuilding security/cyrus-sasl2 with system
>> OpenSSL, i.e., disable SSL option.
>
> I just found that you added the option. X-)
>
> The option is quite misleading. You need to fix the port first as
> some people suggested at the
On 20. 2. 28., Jung-uk Kim wrote:
> On 20. 2. 28., Eugene Grosbein wrote:
>> 28.02.2020 5:02, Jung-uk Kim wrote:
>>
>>> Author: jkim Date: Thu Feb 27 22:02:00 2020 New Revision:
>>> 358411 URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/358411
>>>
>>> Log: Fix style inconsistencies near our OpenSSL
On 20. 2. 28., Eugene Grosbein wrote:
> 28.02.2020 5:02, Jung-uk Kim wrote:
>
>> Author: jkim
>> Date: Thu Feb 27 22:02:00 2020
>> New Revision: 358411
>> URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/358411
>>
>> Log:
>> Fix style inconsistencies near our OpenSSL 1.1.x patch.
>
> Our
28.02.2020 5:02, Jung-uk Kim wrote:
> Author: jkim
> Date: Thu Feb 27 22:02:00 2020
> New Revision: 358411
> URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/358411
>
> Log:
> Fix style inconsistencies near our OpenSSL 1.1.x patch.
Our Handbook describes how to use stock sendmail with SSL and
Author: jkim
Date: Thu Feb 27 22:02:00 2020
New Revision: 358411
URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/358411
Log:
Fix style inconsistencies near our OpenSSL 1.1.x patch.
Modified:
head/contrib/sendmail/src/tls.c
Modified: head/contrib/sendmail/src/tls.c
41 matches
Mail list logo
