Re: reworking docs: mdoc or pod format?

2014-05-09 Thread Thor Lancelot Simon
On Fri, May 09, 2014 at 05:31:16PM -0400, Salz, Rich wrote: > > Please, not mdoc. It doesn't offer any particular feature it's just > different. Not requiring a perl interpreter is a pretty huge feature in my book. Thor __ Open

RE: reworking docs: mdoc or pod format?

2014-05-09 Thread Phong Long
  As Matt said, “Until then, POD is it." I just had to call the project something and mdoc.io was the first thing that came to mind, and hadn’t gotten Matt’s reply yet. What I’ve got for reference for the pod format is: http://perldoc.perl.org/perlpodspec.html and possible extensions via: ft

RE: reworking docs: mdoc or pod format?

2014-05-09 Thread Salz, Rich
Please, not mdoc. It doesn't offer any particular feature it's just different. -- Principal Security Engineer Akamai Technologies, Cambridge, MA IM: rs...@jabber.me; Twitter: RichSalz

Re: reworking docs: mdoc or pod format?

2014-05-09 Thread Phong Long
  Thanks, Matt. I’ve been going through and doing a bit of research to see where the different parts are and how I could contribute. Looking at Viktor’s comments (http://marc.info/?l=openssl-dev&m=139830754423978&w=2), he points out that "too often a new feature impacts multiple documents, a

Re: reworking docs: mdoc or pod format?

2014-05-09 Thread Matt Caswell
On 9 May 2014 18:03, Phong Long wrote: > Hi Dev (sorry if this is a dupe, sent to dev w/ wrong email) > > I’ve been reading up on what it'll take to keep the documentation > up to date as it's something I can do to contribute, but I’m a bit > confused about which format to use. The existing docume

reworking docs: mdoc or pod format?

2014-05-09 Thread Phong Long
Hi Dev (sorry if this is a dupe, sent to dev w/ wrong email) I’ve been reading up on what it'll take to keep the documentation up to date as it's something I can do to contribute, but I’m a bit confused about which format to use. The existing documentation is in pod format, but should they be

[openssl.org #3348] CMS_decrypt_set1_pkey() and key agreement

2014-05-09 Thread Stephen Henson via RT
On Thu May 08 09:48:31 2014, beld...@gmail.com wrote: > Hello Openssl Team, > > I've got a problem with CMS key agreement support. > The command line I use is > > openssl cms -decrypt -inkey seckey.pem -in enc.agree -inform der > > When we enter the CMS_decrypt_set1_pkey() and do not have the cert,

Af_alg engine

2014-05-09 Thread lull...@yahoo.com
Hi, I want to use the openssl commad  to compute various things eg hmac-sha. I want to use '-engine af_alg' for the same. I have taken the af_alg plugin from src.carnivore.it. i have been extending it for eg sha384 etc. I wonder if I can get this engine from openssl.org? ~Jitendra Lulla Sent fr

Re: I'm having the issue to build x64-bit DLL flavor of OpenSSL 1.0.1g with VS2010

2014-05-09 Thread mikmela
Just to give a bit more details - I used pretty much default configuration: 1. perl Configure VC-WIN64A no-asm Configuring for VC-WIN64A no-asm [option] OPENSSL_NO_ASM no-ec_nistp_64_gcc_128 [default] OPENSSL_NO_EC_NISTP_64_GCC_128 (skip dir) no-gmp [default] OPEN

I'm having the issue to build x64-bit DLL flavor of OpenSSL 1.0.1g with VS2010

2014-05-09 Thread mikmela
I'm having the issue to build x64-bit DLL flavor of OpenSSL 1.0.1g with VS2010. The last step when it tries to compile some asm code using ml64 I'm getting the following.. ml64 /c ms\uptable.asm Microsoft (R) Macro Assembler (x64) Version 10.00.40219.01 Copyright (C) Microsoft Corporatio

[openssl.org #3349] Bug report: X509_check_akid() identifies non-self-signed certificate as its own issuer

2014-05-09 Thread Stephan Mühlstrasser via RT
Am 09.05.14 00:53, schrieb Stephen Henson via RT: > On Thu May 08 15:49:11 2014, s...@pdflib.com wrote: >> >> I can confirm that with this patch applied my use case with >> X509_verify_cert() works as expected (misidentification of signing >> certificate as CRL issuer no longer occurs). >> > > Coul