RE: which RPM for SSLeay

1999-02-09 Thread GOMEZ Henri
> > > > Hi !!! > > > > Just a question but what is the right version of RPM for SSLeay. > > > > On ftp.replay.com you got : > > > > SSLeay-0.9.0b-4.i386.rpm > > SSLeay-devel-0.9.0b-4.i386.rpm > > SSLeay-0.9.0b-4.src.rpm > > > > and also > > > > SSLeay-0.9.0b-3.i386.rpm > > SSLeay-devel-0.9.0

Re: which RPM for SSLeay

1999-02-09 Thread Niels Poppe
GOMEZ Henri wrote: > > Hi !!! > > Just a question but what is the right version of RPM for SSLeay. > > On ftp.replay.com you got : > > SSLeay-0.9.0b-4.i386.rpm > SSLeay-devel-0.9.0b-4.i386.rpm > SSLeay-0.9.0b-4.src.rpm > > and also > > SSLeay-0.9.0b-3.i386.rpm > SSLeay-devel-0.9.0b-3.i386.rp

pkcs12-053b released

1999-02-09 Thread GOMEZ Henri
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Just uploaded to ftp://ftp.replay.com/pub/replay/incoming !!! Name: pkcs12 Distribution: (none) Version : 053b Vendor: (none) Release : 0 Build Date: Tue Feb 9 14:58:

which RPM for SSLeay

1999-02-09 Thread GOMEZ Henri
Hi !!! Just a question but what is the right version of RPM for SSLeay. On ftp.replay.com you got : SSLeay-0.9.0b-4.i386.rpm SSLeay-devel-0.9.0b-4.i386.rpm SSLeay-0.9.0b-4.src.rpm and also SSLeay-0.9.0b-3.i386.rpm SSLeay-devel-0.9.0b-3.i386.rpm SSLeay-0.9.0b-3.src.rpm +---

Re: To be a CA !!!

1999-02-09 Thread Ralf S. Engelschall
On Tue, Feb 09, 1999, GOMEZ Henri wrote: > > As a start you can look at the pkg.contrib/mca.sh script in the mod_ssl > > distribution (it creates a CA cert and one or more client certs signed by > > it). Then look at the pkcs12 program from Stephen Henson (you can find a > > link to it under the

RE: To be a CA !!!

1999-02-09 Thread GOMEZ Henri
> As a start you can look at the pkg.contrib/mca.sh script in the > mod_ssl > distribution (it creates a CA cert and one or more client certs signed > by it). > Then look at the pkcs12 program from Stephen Henson (you can find a > link to it > under the Related-section of the mod_ssl website) and

Re: [BugDB] errors not reported when applying patches (PR#102)

1999-02-09 Thread Ralf S. Engelschall
On Tue, Feb 09, 1999, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > I think I got one bug with mod_ssl distrib 2.2.0 and 2.2.2. > When I run mod_ssl's configure, it ends with "patches applyed succesfully" but > some errors have created *.rej files. The problem is that I am never get > notified of those errors. Are

[BugDB] errors not reported when applying patches (PR#102)

1999-02-09 Thread bugdb-mod-ssl
Hi, I think I got one bug with mod_ssl distrib 2.2.0 and 2.2.2. When I run mod_ssl's configure, it ends with "patches applyed succesfully" but some errors have created *.rej files. The problem is that I am never get notified of those errors. -- Ronan-Yann Lorintel: +33 6

Re: Seg Faults, still?

1999-02-09 Thread Ralf S. Engelschall
On Tue, Feb 09, 1999, Toru Takinaka wrote: > >Yeah, and at least under Solaris it's neither a bug in Apache nor in mod_ssl > >nor in SSLeay. As it looks it's a result of a strange loading strategy in the > >Solaris dynamic linker caused by Apache's braindead two-round initialization. > >I've stil

Re: Seg Faults, still?

1999-02-09 Thread Toru Takinaka
>Yeah, and at least under Solaris it's neither a bug in Apache nor in mod_ssl >nor in SSLeay. As it looks it's a result of a strange loading strategy in the >Solaris dynamic linker caused by Apache's braindead two-round initialization. >I've still no workaround for this Solaris problem at hand, b

Re: oops, info about system w/ segfaults

1999-02-09 Thread Khimenko Victor
8-Feb-99 12:31 you wrote: > Khimenko Victor wrote: >> >> If you use libc5-based Linux then try to use built-in SDBM ! >> At least Slackware 3.6 has broken DBM :-(( > Uh oh. Yeah, definately a problem here. Slack 3.6 it is. Excuse me for > not knowing exactly what a "SDBM" is, but I'm left at a