This looks to be a Solaris/Intel Forte compiler bug, but in tl_enc.c and s3_enc.c the
idiom
for (i=7; i>=0; i--)
if (++seq[i]) break;
is used for carrying the increment; default optimization under the above compiler
evaluates the expression as an int, and uses that for the logical, before assigning
into the variable. As 256 is not zero, the condition is always true.
Explicit truncation provides a platform/compiler neutral resolution, thus
for (i=7; i>=0; i--)
if (++seq[i] & 0xFF) break;
----------------------------------------------------------------
Get your free email from AltaVista at http://altavista.iname.com
______________________________________________________________________
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
Development Mailing List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Automated List Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED]
