Hi Steph, Didn't see this show up on openssl-dev but that's probably because of the attachments. In any case, I'll top-post to leave your original email there (minus attachment) so that it's visible for whoever else wants to know.
FWIW, I had your original post still flagged as "TODO" in my mail-client, it's just that like many other openssl hackers, windows is not my primary (or even secondary) environment. In fact, as it happens I haven't touched it at all in a couple of years but I need to reaquaint myself with it soon for other reasons, so had planned on taking a look at your stuff then (esp. as it deals with engine things). Please ping me personally in a while if you've still not heard anything, but FWIW this hadn't gone unnoticed, just unprocessed. OTOH if others get to this before I do then great, but I will try to take a peek some time soon. Cheers, Geoff On Saturday 05 July 2008 19:25:33 Steph Fox wrote: > Ignore my patches from last week, please. I've now split them down now into > smaller chunks, added some bits I missed the first time around and checked > everything I've done against the OpenSSL bug tracker: > > - bug #1335 is fixed by the 'engine' patch (no-engine build fails) > - bug #1704 is fixed by the 'build' patch (/Zi request) > - bug #1598 should be closed as a duplicate of #153. The changed subject > for #153 means the earlier report doesn't show up in bug tracker searches > for ssl3_send_alert - that should probably be altered. > > The 'engine' patch also introduces three --enable-* options for items that > are supposedly disabled by default, and disables them by default. Without > these changes, no-engine is still broken in mk1mf builds. > > The 'build' patch also offers debug makefiles, adds library suffixes to > differentiate between dynamic/static/release/debug builds, and fixes a > handful of typos - some of which are *in variable names* - in the VC-32 > makefile generation script. > > There are two smaller patches, one of which allows nasm or no-asm to be > passed as an argument to ms/32all.bat in 0.9.8 or 0.9.9-dev, and the other > of which fixes an MSVC compile warning (read: build failure) in 0.9.9-dev > only. > > The patches were all created using diff -ur --binary, which forces UNIX > line endings on all affected files. You may find that you need to run > patch -p1 --binary when applying them. Note that batch files do NOT need > CR/LF in order to run under NT-based systems. > > I'd like to start work on making the test suite functional for builds with > configure lines other than 'perl Configure VC-WIN32', but it's a bit > pointless if nobody on the OpenSSL dev team responds. I didn't even know > the patches I sent last week wouldn't apply cleanly until I updated my > openssl snaps to check for intervening changes - and following the > instructions in the README turns all diff output to DOS, which I'm pretty > sure isn't the way to go :) > > Thanks, > > - Steph > > ps This is the second time of sending. The openssl.org mail host doesn't > like patches this week - hopefully it copes with tar.gz. -- Un terrien, c'est un singe avec des clefs de char... ______________________________________________________________________ OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org Development Mailing List openssl-dev@openssl.org Automated List Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED]
