https://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3548
Darren Tucker changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3548
--- Comment #10 from Damien Miller ---
I withdraw my version of the diff. Darren, do you want to commit yours?
IMO we should keep the status check that is in yours but not in the
post to the mailing list.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
https://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3548
Damien Miller changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #3685||ok-
Flags|
https://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3548
--- Comment #9 from Sam James ---
See also https://marc.info/?l=openssh-unix-dev&m=168348988530204&w=2.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching the assignee of the bug.
You are watching someone on the CC list of the bug.
___
https://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3548
Damien Miller changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #3684||ok+
Flags|
https://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3548
Darren Tucker changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||3549
Referenced Bugs:
https://bugzilla.
https://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3548
psykose changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||al...@ayaya.dev
--
You are receiving this mail
https://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3548
--- Comment #8 from Darren Tucker ---
(In reply to Darren Tucker from comment #7)
> since in that case the dynamic linking would fail
actually adding accessors would be fine, only deleting them would be a
problem, so I don't see any reason we'd w
https://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3548
--- Comment #7 from Darren Tucker ---
Comment on attachment 3685
--> https://bugzilla.mindrot.org/attachment.cgi?id=3685
My take
>+lfix = (libver & 0x0ff0L) >> 12;
That's going to include the patchlevel which we previously did not
https://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3548
--- Comment #6 from Sam James ---
(In reply to Damien Miller from comment #4)
> I could interpret this to mean that a minor release could adding
> API. It would still be API/ABI compatible but only in one direction.
This is generally the case for
https://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3548
--- Comment #5 from Sam James ---
Ah, thanks, that makes sense. I thought I remembered 1.0 and 1.1 being
incompatible so I knew something had changed, but didn't dig into what
yet.
Your patch seems to work and cope with upgrading openssl.
--
Yo
https://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3548
--- Comment #4 from Damien Miller ---
Created attachment 3685
--> https://bugzilla.mindrot.org/attachment.cgi?id=3685&action=edit
My take
Don't we still want to prevent backsliding? The OpenSSL page says this:
"MINOR: API/ABI compatible featur
https://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3548
Darren Tucker changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||d...@mindrot.org
Attachment #3684|
https://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3548
Darren Tucker changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dtuc...@dtucker.net
--- Comment #2 from D
https://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3548
--- Comment #1 from Sam James ---
(This is with 9.2_p1).
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching the assignee of the bug.
___
openssh-bugs mailing list
openssh-bugs@mindrot.org
https:/
15 matches
Mail list logo
