Issue got fixed after adding /fixed flag in the linker. One mistake was
fipscanister.lib was in the link like. Issue resolved after removing
fipscanister.lib from the link line.
Thanks everyone for your help.
Thanks,
-Vimol
On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 10:49 PM, Dr. Stephen Henson wrote:
> On Mon, A
On Mon, Apr 16, 2012, Vimol Kshetrimayum wrote:
> It is still not working for me. I had tried all possible place to add
> /dynamicbase:NO and/or /fixed flag.
>
> I am wondering how it was working for Grant Averett.
> Where did you exactly add the /FIXED flag?
>
That's weird. I can reproduce tha
> It is still not working for me. I had tried all possible place to add
> /dynamicbase:NO and/or /fixed flag.
Well, lack of dynamic base in DLL characteristics in dumpbin output is
sufficient for knowing that /dynamicbase:no went down. As for /fixed,
double-check if it has .reloc segment left. Wit
It is still not working for me. I had tried all possible place to add
/dynamicbase:NO and/or /fixed flag.
I am wondering how it was working for Grant Averett.
Where did you exactly add the /FIXED flag?
Thanks,
-Vimol
On Sun, Apr 15, 2012 at 6:51 PM, Dr. Stephen Henson wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 15,
On Sun, Apr 15, 2012, Vimol Kshetrimayum wrote:
> Andy Polyakov openssl.org> writes:
>
> >
> > > I tested this on the x86 version of the DLL and I imagine it will fix
> > > the x64 DLL as well (they both reported the same error). It looks
> > > like this setting will need to be added for VS201
Andy Polyakov openssl.org> writes:
>
> > I tested this on the x86 version of the DLL and I imagine it will fix
> > the x64 DLL as well (they both reported the same error). It looks
> > like this setting will need to be added for VS2010.
>
> As mentioned [in another reply], I was under impressi
Andy Polyakov openssl.org> writes:
>
> > I tested this on the x86 version of the DLL and I imagine it will fix
> > the x64 DLL as well (they both reported the same error). It looks
> > like this setting will need to be added for VS2010.
>
> As mentioned [in another reply], I was under impressi
> I tested this on the x86 version of the DLL and I imagine it will fix
> the x64 DLL as well (they both reported the same error). It looks
> like this setting will need to be added for VS2010.
As mentioned [in another reply], I was under impression that x64 code is
always position-independent, i
will fix the x64 DLL as well (they both reported the same error).
> It looks like this setting will need to be added for VS2010.
Thanks to everyone for all of your help!
Grant
> Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2010 21:30:36 +0200
> From: ap...@openssl.org
> To: openssl-dev@openssl.org
> Subject:
> On Windows it is not possible to require that a DLL be loaded at a
> specific address in memory within a process. The base address is simply
> a recommendation and if correct will result in the library loading
> process being faster than if it is not.
Correct and prerequisite for recommended ba
Question #1. Are we talking about 32-bit version or is it the problem
with *both* x86 and x64 code?
> Even specifying a different base address doesn't fix the problem. I
> have a different default address that the DLL consistently gets
> relocated to but changing the preferred base address of lib
On Mon, Oct 18, 2010, Grant Averett wrote:
>
> Even specifying a different base address doesn't fix the problem. I have a
> different default address that the DLL consistently gets relocated to but
> changing the preferred base address of libeay32 to that address still doesn't
> work. The DLL
ant
> Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2010 09:54:18 -0400
> From: jalt...@secure-endpoints.com
> To: openssl-dev@openssl.org
> Subject: Re: FIPS Module 1.2 build with Visual Studio 2010 fails self-tests
>
> On 10/17/2010 4:36 PM, Dr. Stephen Henson wrote:
> > On Sun, Oct 17, 2010, aero
On 10/17/2010 4:36 PM, Dr. Stephen Henson wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 17, 2010, aerow...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>> Ugh. This is worse than I thought. It's *intermittently* failing like
>> that. After a few more minutes, I tried it again, and got the expected
>> output.
>>
>> Is there some way to specify
Oct 2010 09:27:21 -0700
> Subject: Re: FIPS Module 1.2 build with Visual Studio 2010 fails self-tests
>
> Ugh. This is worse than I thought. It's *intermittently* failing like that.
> After a few more minutes, I tried it again, and got the expected output.
>
> Is there
On Sun, Oct 17, 2010, aerow...@gmail.com wrote:
> Ugh. This is worse than I thought. It's *intermittently* failing like
> that. After a few more minutes, I tried it again, and got the expected
> output.
>
> Is there some way to specify a base address during the creation of the DLL,
> after t
Ugh. This is worse than I thought. It's *intermittently* failing like that.
After a few more minutes, I tried it again, and got the expected output.
Is there some way to specify a base address during the creation of the DLL,
after the fipscanister is created? Would that invalidate it?
The
Dr Henson:
I just built fips-1.2 under VS2010 (from a Visual Studio 2010 command prompt,
under Windows Server 2008 [not 2008R2]). Running out32dll\openssl.exe itself,
with environment OPENSSL_FIPS=1, returns:
C:\openssl-fips-1.2\openssl-fips-1.2\out32dll>openssl
5324:error:2D06906E:FIPS routi
On Sat, Oct 16, 2010, Grant Averett wrote:
>
> Hello, I've successfully built the validated FIPS object module and OpenSSL
> 0.9.8o on Windows with Visual Studio 2008 many times (both an x86 and x64
> version) without issue and I can successfully build both with Visual Studio
> 2010. However, th
19 matches
Mail list logo
