(Replying to you instead of to the list as I can't ...) That was an oversight on my part. As part of the porting process, I was removing as many potential variables as possible. I neglected to reinstate that code before posting the file.
I apologize for any confusion. John Withers Enterprise Operations Directory Services Branch - OS:CTO:EO:ISD:DSB:PKI Champaign, Illinois Phone: (217) 974-7736 -----Original Message----- From: Richard Levitte via RT [mailto:r...@openssl.org] Sent: Friday, May 06, 2016 8:13 AM To: Withers John Z Cc: openssl-dev@openssl.org Subject: [openssl.org #4522] Update to openssl.spec supplied with 1.0.1s Vid Thu, 05 May 2016 kl. 13.57.47, skrev rs...@akamai.com: > > > 1.0.1 is at end-of life and is only getting security fixes for the > rest of the year. > 1.0.2 is LTS and maybe this needs to be ported there (and master) as > well? master, without a doubt. I think 1.0.2 as well. There's one think I must question though... the attached openssl.spec removes all the architecture variants. Why? Cheers, Richard -- Richard Levitte levi...@openssl.org -- Ticket here: http://rt.openssl.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=4522 Please log in as guest with password guest if prompted -- Ticket here: http://rt.openssl.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=4522 Please log in as guest with password guest if prompted -- openssl-dev mailing list To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-dev
