On Mon, Mar 03, 2003 at 05:34:20PM +0100, Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker wrote:
> I'm surprised by how little seems to need changed. Is that really
> possible? I imagined the EBCDIC issue was a much bugger can of worms.
The majority of the EBCDIC changes are already in the code, and run
in produc
I'm surprised by how little seems to need changed. Is that really
possible? I imagined the EBCDIC issue was a much bugger can of worms.
--
Richard Levitte \ Spannvägen 38, II \ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] \ S-168 35 BROMMA \ T: +46-8-26 52 47
\ SWEDEN
> I vote for including the patch into mainstream OpenSSL. I repeat the
> ('@'-fixed) Howard Chu EBCDIC patch in this mail because the version
> from http://www.openldap.org/faq/index.cgi?file=745 does not
> apply cleanly (HTML-escapes present).
Oops - I fell into the same trap (HTML-frontends for
> -Original Message-
> From: Martin Kraemer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Hello Howard, hello OpenSSL developers,
Hello!
> At
> http://www.openldap.org/faq/index.cgi?file=745
> you print the set of patches to OpenSSL, and I verified them to work
> on our BS2000 version of OpenSSL as well
> Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2003 13:34:41 -0800
> From: Howard Chu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: RE: EBCDIC
>
> I ported OpenLDAP, OpenSSL, Berkeley DB 4.1, and part of Cyrus SASL to
> OS/390. Aside from Cyrus, all of these packages were fully functional but
> OpenLDAP and OpenSSL operate with ASCII inte
