At 06:34 PM 12/12/02 +0100, Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker wrote: >In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Wed, 11 Dec 2002 08:24:47 +0000, Bertie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > >bertie> In view of the fact that the chil engine code is only >bertie> threadsafe if the dynlock callbacks are implemented, and that >bertie> it is unlikely that openssl application developers will get >bertie> round to providing these solely for the benefit of the chil >bertie> engine would it be please be possible (I'm begging) to apply >bertie> the part of the patch (#381) I supplied which allows the chil >bertie> engine to use one static lock if dynlocks are not supported by >bertie> the app. > >I've just applied the patch. Unfortunately, I don't have any hardware >to test against, but I'm going to commit it immediately. Please test >it as soon as possible (pick up the snapshot tomorrow, for example).
Your changes aren't in the latest snapshot, openssl-0.9.7-stable-SNAP-20021212.tar.gz. Is there some other way that I can test them ? Bertie ______________________________________________________________________ OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org Development Mailing List [EMAIL PROTECTED] Automated List Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED]
