The 'rt' is the 'request tracker' system.  It essentially opens a
trouble ticket, which allows for any action on the patch to be
identified and tracked.  (When it's updated by the core OS developers
when they take an action on a patch, anyway. :))

It also -- more importantly to you, in this case -- automatically
sends a mail to openssl-dev when a new request is submitted -- which
allows for the discussion that you're looking for to take place.

-Kyle H

On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 4:52 PM, Allan K Pratt <[email protected]> wrote:
> Kyle Hamilton <[email protected]> wrote:
>> The best way is to send a patch (unified diff) to [email protected]. ...
> The module owner will review the patch and apply it if appropriate...
>
> Thanks for the guidance. I'll try that route.
>
> I guess I was hoping to get a little bit of back-and-forth with the
> component owner(s), to validate the *idea* of the patch first. I don't
> know the process on the "rt" list: does sending a patch there start a
> discussion, or is it more of a yes/no decision at that point? Since this
> patch isn't about correctness on its face, and understanding its
> motivation and import might take some discussion, I'd like to connect with
> a person rather than send the patch to a potential black hole. Will I hear
> from somebody if my patch is rejected?
>
> By the way, a Purify user on this list asked privately about the symptom,
> the behavior when PurifyPlus goes bad. The program instruments without
> error, but then it misbehaves at runtime if you execute the functions in
> des_enc.m4. Those functions have names like DES_encrypt1 (and -2 and -3)
> and DES_decrypt3 plus a couple of others starting with DES. If you don't
> end up in those you'll be fine. The user who reported this got a SEGV,
> which at least has the virtue of being obvious. I'm not sure, but it is
> also possible that you could silently get incorrect encryption or
> decryption without crashing; this would be much worse from the user's
> perspective. It depends on how those tables are used. (I didn't grok the
> whole implementation, just identified the trick that gave Purify grief.)
>
> -- Allan Pratt, [email protected]
> Rational software division of IBM
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> OpenSSL Project                                 http://www.openssl.org
> Development Mailing List                       [email protected]
> Automated List Manager                           [email protected]
>
______________________________________________________________________
OpenSSL Project                                 http://www.openssl.org
Development Mailing List                       [email protected]
Automated List Manager                           [email protected]

Reply via email to