As I mentioned a few days ago, can you tell whether the top-level
'rehash' target is getting executed as a prerequisite? Can you try
execting 'make rehash make test' to see if that fixes the problem?
I suggest this because this looks very similar to an error I
encountered during my build system
Is the top-level rehash target not getting executed? It should be a
dependency of test (via the tests target).
Mike
On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 1:41 AM, The Doctor doc...@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca wrote:
Just found this in the latest openssl 1.0.2 snapshot
Script started on Mon Sep 8 23:19:16 2014
Withdrawn. Commits b0426a0f8c6ce7656411b037e0c45465320cb325 and
86f50b36e63275a916b147f9d8764e3c0c060fdb are identical to those in the
original pull request.
Mike
On Sun, Aug 31, 2014 at 8:19 AM, The default queue via RT
r...@openssl.org wrote:
Greetings,
This message has been automatically
Pull request #145 [openssl.org #3447] contains the commit
{,darwin64-}debug-test-64-clang Configure targets. A couple of
recent commits on openssl:master cause builds configured for these
targets to fail. The commits in this pull request contain fixes for
these issues:
As per my experimentation, reported results and ensuing discussion,
I'd appreciate a decision on whether to move forward with adopting a
single-Makefile build structure:
Report (Google Docs): http://goo.gl/yhvCno
https://groups.google.com/d/topic/openssl-testing/AUJME_4xkWM/discussion
Ping... Would appreciate getting some of these changes pulled. Ready
to answer any questions, address any issues.
Thanks,
Mike
On Wed, Jul 9, 2014 at 3:27 PM, The default queue via RT r...@openssl.org
wrote:
Greetings,
This message has been automatically generated in response to the
Just issued pull request #160:
https://github.com/openssl/openssl/pull/160
Will update the thread with the RT issue number when it comes through.
Mike
__
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
Just generated a pull request for this; let me know if it's what you
actually had in mind:
https://github.com/openssl/openssl/pull/161
Mike
On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 12:08 PM, Rich Salz via RT r...@openssl.org wrote:
Doing make clean should remove all build artifacts, while make dclean should
Whoops, OK. :-P
Mike
On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 1:22 PM, Salz, Rich rs...@akamai.com wrote:
Just generated a pull request for this; let me know if it's what you actually
had in mind:
https://github.com/openssl/openssl/pull/161
I already had the fix in-hand :) See attached.
--
Principal
If I may redirect the discussion here, interesting as it is... I've
got a refactoring of the build system in-hand, compatible with tools
already in use. As much as folks may be in support of adopting a new
build system entirely--which I agree, might be worthwhile--I'd like
feedback on the work
can't
join that bandwagon.
-Tim
-Original Message-
From: owner-openssl-...@openssl.org [mailto:owner-openssl-...@openssl.org]
On Behalf Of Mike Bland
Sent: Thursday, August 14, 2014 5:35 PM
To: openssl-dev@openssl.org
Subject: Re: Single-Makefile Build Experiment report
On Thu
Nathan and Tim,
Thanks much for helping refocus here. Responses inline.
On Fri, Aug 15, 2014 at 10:29 AM, Nathan Typanski ntypan...@gmail.com wrote:
Mike,
Sorry for contributing to the off-topic discussion. I'll try to make
up for it by posting some interesting data.
No worries; I've
Ah, ccache...all those years at the old company rotted so much of my memory. :-P
Still, it does look like the single-Makefile results are a win.
Mike
On Fri, Aug 15, 2014 at 1:44 PM, Nathan Typanski ntypan...@gmail.com wrote:
I forgot the only important timing command in the above sequence:
As announced on the openssl-testing list, I'm happy to report early,
promising success in my Makefile refactoring experiment. Here's the
short link to the Google Doc containing all of the details:
http://goo.gl/yhvCno
Feedback welcome. Regardless of the ultimate judgment of the
experiment, I'm
On Thu, Aug 14, 2014 at 4:32 PM, Tim Hollebeek tholleb...@trustwave.com wrote:
Have you considered moving to CMake? It makes lots of the issues you discuss
in the document just go away. cmake should work on the vast majority of
supported operating systems, if not all of them ...
Nope;
Thanks, Matt!
Mike
On Sun, Jul 13, 2014 at 6:52 PM, Matt Caswell via RT r...@openssl.org wrote:
Hi Mike
I'm looking at this. I'll get back to you once I've reviewed.
Matt
__
OpenSSL Project
Thanks, Matt!
Mike
On Sun, Jul 13, 2014 at 6:52 PM, Matt Caswell via RT r...@openssl.org wrote:
Hi Mike
I'm looking at this. I'll get back to you once I've reviewed.
Matt
__
OpenSSL Project
I'm (slowly) helping on the unit testing front. Check out
http://wiki.openssl.org/index.php/Unit_Testing and
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/openssl-testing for more info.
Currently I'm working on trying to refactor bits of the build system,
which I hope will make it easier to perform
I've got a pile of small test/build system commits pending in the
following pull requests:
test/testutil.h test registry macros
https://github.com/openssl/openssl/pull/144
Build environment updates
https://github.com/openssl/openssl/pull/145
Should I trickle them into openssl-dev a
https://github.com/openssl/openssl/pull/144
These macros help standardize the structure of main() and result
reporting, providing confirmation that all tests have run, even when
they pass. This pull also contains the change to apply these macros to
ssl/heartbeat_test.c.
https://github.com/openssl/openssl/pull/145
This pull contains commits to fix the OS X build and allow GitMake test to pass.
__
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
Development Mailing List
Investigating... It seems to be an issue with the makedepend tool itself.
I hacked util/domd to show the makedepend command line, and got this
command for apps/:
makedepend -D OPENSSL_DOING_MAKEDEPEND -- -O -I.. -I../include
-DOPENSSL_NO_DEPRECATED -DOPENSSL_NO_EC_NISTP_64_GCC_128
Whoops, of course, I meant it generates the same output for dsa.o, and
only dsa.o.
Mike
On Tue, Jul 1, 2014 at 11:58 AM, Mike Bland mbl...@acm.org wrote:
Investigating... It seems to be an issue with the makedepend tool itself.
I hacked util/domd to show the makedepend command line, and got
AM, Mike Bland mbl...@acm.org wrote:
Whoops, of course, I meant it generates the same output for dsa.o, and
only dsa.o.
Mike
On Tue, Jul 1, 2014 at 11:58 AM, Mike Bland mbl...@acm.org wrote:
Investigating... It seems to be an issue with the makedepend tool itself.
I hacked util/domd
On Tue, Jul 1, 2014 at 12:42 PM, Ben Laurie b...@links.org wrote:
On 1 July 2014 17:21, Mike Bland mbl...@acm.org wrote:
Ah! Sorry for the spam, but I think I got it. According to the
makedepend man page:
http://www.x.org/archive/current/doc/man/man1/makedepend.1.xhtml
Makedepend makes
I was wondering why 'make depend' output was saved in the Makefiles.
So I guess adding the .d files to the repository and using include
statements in the Makefiles is a reasonable possibility? (That's the
angle I'm taking with my experiment, though I hadn't thought to add
the .d's to the repo.)
on openssl/master.) I'd be interested in hearing what
folks think of them.
Mike
On Tue, Jul 1, 2014 at 4:57 PM, Theodore Ts'o ty...@mit.edu wrote:
On Tue, Jul 01, 2014 at 02:10:31PM -0400, Mike Bland wrote:
I was wondering why 'make depend' output was saved in the Makefiles.
So I guess adding
On Sat, Jun 7, 2014 at 10:00 PM, Jeremy Farrell
jeremy.farr...@oracle.com wrote:
From: Mike Bland [mailto:mbl...@acm.org]
Sent: Saturday, June 07, 2014 6:36 PM
Just created https://github.com/openssl/openssl/pull/126 with what I
hope is a workable solution.
104 +#if __STDC_VERSION__
!
If some special source code generation can make sense, the same !
PS : these techniques have been used on Java, quite valuable.
For the openssl group I can provide support on these tools
Thanks
Didier CRUETTE
Le 06.06.2014 19:56, Mike Bland a écrit :
I've created the openssl-testing
Before this goes in, I'm going to take this opportunity to raise a
question that I've documented on the wiki (which came up in a
discussion off-list):
http://wiki.openssl.org/index.php/Unit_Testing#How_to_Manage_Private_Symbols
Why do any of the symbols need to be private? Is that degree of
On Sat, Jun 7, 2014 at 4:33 AM, Tim Hudson t...@cryptsoft.com wrote:
On 7/06/2014 4:02 AM, Dr. Stephen Henson wrote:
On Fri, Jun 06, 2014, Mike Bland wrote:
__func__ is defined in C99. What version of the SGI C compiler are you
using? According to the following, as of version 7.4, the -c99
__func__ is defined in C99. What version of the SGI C compiler are you
using? According to the following, as of version 7.4, the -c99 flag
should enable this to compile:
http://www.sgi.com/products/software/irix/tools/c.html
Mike
On Fri, Jun 6, 2014 at 3:14 AM, Pieter Bowman via RT
I've created the openssl-testing mailing list (via Google Groups) to
discuss the OpenSSL unit/automated testing effort, to avoid clogging
openssl-dev:
https://groups.google.com/d/forum/openssl-testing
Membership is open to whoever wishes to join, even if only to lurk.
Ideally all testing
On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 2:41 PM, Kurt Roeckx via RT r...@openssl.org wrote:
Hi,
When building the 1.0.1h release I got this error:
heartbeat_test.o: In function `set_up':
test/heartbeat_test.c:94: undefined reference to `ssl_init_wbio_buffer'
test/heartbeat_test.c:102: undefined reference to
to help add some of this valgrind support?
Mike
On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 10:04 AM, Reini Urban re...@cpanel.net wrote:
On 06/04/2014 04:58 PM, Mike Bland wrote:
Thanks to a few brave volunteers and the support of the core OpenSSL
team, it looks like we can begin moving on this effort soon. I've
Thanks to a few brave volunteers and the support of the core OpenSSL
team, it looks like we can begin moving on this effort soon. I've
begun to document the current state of things on the wiki:
http://wiki.openssl.org/index.php/Unit_Testing
There's lots to discuss with regard to the Goals,
Hey folks,
With Ben Laurie's help, I recently contributed ssl/heartbeat_test.c,
which is a unit test that acts as a regression test against the
Heartbleed bug. I'd like to contribute more to the project in the
coming months in terms of helping grow a robust suite of
unit/integration/automated
Just opened https://github.com/openssl/openssl/pull/110 with a fix.
Mike
On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 2:28 PM, Lukas Tribus luky...@hotmail.com wrote:
Hey guys!
Since commit 6af080acaf (Unit/regression test for TLS heartbeats.),
when compiling master/OpenSSL_1_0_2-stable/OpenSSL_1_0_1-stable with
Oh, absolutely I've verified it. :-)
I'll get that turned around to you shortly.
Mike
On Sat, Apr 26, 2014 at 6:33 AM, Ben Laurie b...@links.org wrote:
On 24 April 2014 18:44, Mike Bland mbl...@acm.org wrote:
On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 1:31 PM, Ben Laurie b...@links.org wrote:
6. Write
Unit test for the TLS heartbeat code; acts as a regression test against
CVE-2014-0160.
Thanks,
Mike
heartbeat_test.patch
Description: Binary data
I've prepared a proof-of-concept unit/regression test for the Heartbleed
bug that I've posted at: http://goo.gl/wTYD9K
If folks are interested, I can prepare an official patch to add it to
OpenSSL.
Thanks,
Mike
mbl...@acm.org
41 matches
Mail list logo
