Thanks for the advice Andreas, will do! Nathan
On Tue, 8 Mar 2016 at 18:09 Andreas Oberritter <[email protected]> wrote: > Hello Nathan, > > On 08.03.2016 22:49, ngutzmann wrote: > > The variable in question should have been called ecc->p. The patch has > been updated > > so that the compilation of the nettle recipe would complete successfully. > > > > Signed-off-by: ngutzmann <[email protected]> > > --- > > meta/recipes-support/nettle/nettle-2.7.1/CVE-2015-8803_8805.patch | 2 +- > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git > a/meta/recipes-support/nettle/nettle-2.7.1/CVE-2015-8803_8805.patch > b/meta/recipes-support/nettle/nettle-2.7.1/CVE-2015-8803_8805.patch > > index 1c4b9a9..a956f42 100644 > > --- a/meta/recipes-support/nettle/nettle-2.7.1/CVE-2015-8803_8805.patch > > +++ b/meta/recipes-support/nettle/nettle-2.7.1/CVE-2015-8803_8805.patch > > @@ -40,7 +40,7 @@ Index: nettle-2.7.1/ecc-256.c > > u1 -= cy; > > - u1 += cnd_add_n (t, rp + n - 4, ecc->p, 3); > > + > > -+ cy = cnd_add_n (t, rp + n - 4, p->m, 2); > > ++ cy = cnd_add_n (t, rp + n - 4, ecc->p, 2); > > + u0 += cy; > > + u1 += (u0 < cy); > > u1 -= (-t) & 0xffffffff; > > > > looks good to me. However, I needed to lookup the commit where the > backport originated from, because the reason for exchanging m and p > isn't obvious at all without knowing the original commit. Maybe you > could include it in your commit message. > > > https://git.lysator.liu.se/nettle/nettle/commit/c71d2c9d20eeebb985e3872e4550137209e3ce4d > > Regards, > Andreas > -- > _______________________________________________ > Openembedded-core mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core >
-- _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
