Re: All active branches pass on OpenVMS! :-)

2009-05-15 Thread Steven M. Schweda
From: Richard Levitte > I think I'm missing VMS/openssl_startup.com and VMS/startup_undo.com. > Could you share them with me? I see: openssl-0_9_8k/VMS/openssl_startup.com and openssl-0_9_8k/VMS/openssl_undo.com in: http://antinode.info/ftp/openssl/0_9_8k/openssl-0_9_8k_s1.z

Re: [Q] AES performance with 1.0.0 beta 2

2009-05-15 Thread Iain Morgan
I tested the 20090515 1.0 snapshot on both of the two systems mentioned in the previous posts as well as several other Intel systems. In all of the cases, the AES performance is now in the range I would expact. Thanks Iain On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 16:14:04 -0700, Iain Morgan wrote: > Hi A

[openssl.org #1922] [PATCH] DTLS Timer Bug

2009-05-15 Thread Stephen Henson via RT
Patch applied to 1.0.0 and HEAD. Should this go into 0.9.8 too? __ OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org Development Mailing List openssl-dev@openssl.org Automated List Manager

[openssl.org #1929] DTLS MTU bug

2009-05-15 Thread Robin Seggelmann via RT
On May 12, 2009, at 8:24 PM, Daniel Mentz wrote: > I've got the impression that the DTLS part of OpenSSL is based on an > incorrect understanding of the term MTU (Maximum Transmission Unit). > > My understanding is that the MTU refers to the size of the IP packet > including the IP header (us

Re: [Q] AES performance with 1.0.0 beta 2

2009-05-15 Thread Iain Morgan
Hi Andy, Thanks. I tried the latest from CVS this morning and it fixed the Athlon 64 issue but not the Xeon one. To play it safe, I'll test the snaphost tomorrow on both systems and let you know the results. Iain On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 14:30:08 -0500, Andy Polyakov wrote: > Hi, > > > For the

Re: All active branches pass on OpenVMS! :-)

2009-05-15 Thread Richard Levitte
I think I'm missing VMS/openssl_startup.com and VMS/startup_undo.com. Could you share them with me? Cheers, Richard -- Richard Levitte rich...@levitte.org http://richard.levitte.org/ "Life is a tremendous celebration - and I'm invi

Re: All active branches pass on OpenVMS! :-)

2009-05-15 Thread Richard Levitte
In message <09051509015335_2020a...@antinode.info> on Fri, 15 May 2009 09:01:53 -0500 (CDT), s...@antinode.info (Steven M. Schweda) said: sms> From: Richard Levitte sms> sms> > [...] sms> > Oh, right, there is ONE thing I can mention already... I'm not going sms> > to change the tests for f$ge

Re: All active branches pass on OpenVMS! :-)

2009-05-15 Thread Steven M. Schweda
From: Richard Levitte > [...] > Oh, right, there is ONE thing I can mention already... I'm not going > to change the tests for f$getsyi("CPU") to ones for > f$getsyi("HW_MODEL"), because there are some (VAX) VMS versions out > there that do not support the latter and therefore create failure.

Re: All active branches pass on OpenVMS! :-)

2009-05-15 Thread Richard Levitte
In message <20090515.103201.120426372.rich...@levitte.org> on Fri, 15 May 2009 10:32:01 +0200 (CEST), Richard Levitte said: richard> In message <09051312480852_2020a...@antinode.info> on Wed, 13 May 2009 12:48:08 -0500 (CDT), s...@antinode.info (Steven M. Schweda) said: richard> richard> sms>

Re: All active branches pass on OpenVMS! :-)

2009-05-15 Thread Richard Levitte
In message <09051312480852_2020a...@antinode.info> on Wed, 13 May 2009 12:48:08 -0500 (CDT), s...@antinode.info (Steven M. Schweda) said: sms> From: Richard Levitte sms> sms> > I just had the latest snapshots built, and all of them pass on sms> > OpenVMS Alpha V8.3 using HP C V7.1-015 and the T