Please review the proposed patch for /openssl-1.0.1g/crypto/opensslv.h meant to correct a typo in the SHLIB_VERSION_NUMBER at the end of this message.
Recently I compiled OpenSSL 1.0.1g and found that it numbers the version shown in the filename of the .dylib made with the -shared configuration option and in the OS X "Compatibility version" variable ( otool -L /usr/lib/libssl.dylib ) incorrectly. It shows 1.0.0 both of the above ways if built directly from source. The version of the openssl binary ends up correct, ( /usr/bin/openssl version ) it shows up as intended, so I don't think this has security implications. Nevertheless it can be a hassle (major or minor) since it misidentifies itself to the OS or other programs, thus if a program is linked to version 1.0.1, said program may fail to run assuming incorrectly OpenSSL is version 1.0.0 and thus too old. Given that both the OpenSSL project and Apple place great emphasis on even very small version number differences, it seems important to be as accurate as possible in this context. A tiny patch with diff -u, to correct the typo, and change the SHLIB_VERSION_NUMBER from 1.0.0 to 1.0.1 --- PATCH --- --- /openssl-1.0.1g/crypto/opensslv.h 2014-04-07 19:55:44.000000000 +0300 +++ /openssl-1.0.1g/crypto/opensslv_NEW.h 2014-05-17 08:05:52.000000000 +0300 @@ -83,7 +83,7 @@ * should only keep the versions that are binary compatible with the current. */ #define SHLIB_VERSION_HISTORY "" -#define SHLIB_VERSION_NUMBER "1.0.0" +#define SHLIB_VERSION_NUMBER "1.0.1" #endif /* HEADER_OPENSSLV_H */ --- END PATCH --- -- Любомир Гаврилов Дяков емайл: lubodia...@gmail.com ______________________________________________________________________ OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org Development Mailing List openssl-dev@openssl.org Automated List Manager majord...@openssl.org
