On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 04:57:21PM +0100, Mark Kettenis wrote:
From: Bob Beck b...@openbsd.org
Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2014 08:39:15 -0700
i.e. if we want the openssl command to report someting specific we
put it in there, not a globally visible string that will be used for
the wrong
To reduce reliance on this string, and to make it more consistently
correct between LibreSSL-portable releases, reduce OPENSSL_VERSION_TEXT
to say the bare minimum.
There are better, more portable and consistent mechanisms for
determining the installed versions of packages, such as the OS package
Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2014 08:15:06 -0600
From: Brent Cook bust...@gmail.com
To reduce reliance on this string, and to make it more consistently
correct between LibreSSL-portable releases, reduce OPENSSL_VERSION_TEXT
to say the bare minimum.
There are better, more portable and consistent
Absolutely yes.
On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 7:15 AM, Brent Cook bust...@gmail.com wrote:
To reduce reliance on this string, and to make it more consistently
correct between LibreSSL-portable releases, reduce OPENSSL_VERSION_TEXT
to say the bare minimum.
There are better, more portable
between LibreSSL-portable releases, reduce OPENSSL_VERSION_TEXT
to say the bare minimum.
There are better, more portable and consistent mechanisms for
determining the installed versions of packages, such as the OS package
manager, versions on user-generated packages, or the pkg-config tool
, Dec 11, 2014 at 8:34 AM, Mark Kettenis mark.kette...@xs4all.nl
wrote:
Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2014 08:15:06 -0600
From: Brent Cook bust...@gmail.com
To reduce reliance on this string, and to make it more consistently
correct between LibreSSL-portable releases, reduce OPENSSL_VERSION_TEXT
to say
From: Bob Beck b...@openbsd.org
Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2014 08:39:15 -0700
i.e. if we want the openssl command to report someting specific we
put it in there, not a globally visible string that will be used for
the wrong things.
I think you guys are trying to hard to prevent people to shoot
