On Tue, Dec 31, 2002 at 01:34:07AM +0100, Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker wrote:
> o Support for new platforms: Windows CE, Tandem OSS, A/UX, AIX 64-bit,
> Linux x86_64, Linux 64-bit on Sparc v9
OpenSSL does not compile out of the box on FreeBSD/SPARC (see
attached) - it tries to use
On Mon, Dec 30, 2002 at 10:45:30PM -0800, Kris Kennaway wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 31, 2002 at 01:34:07AM +0100, Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker wrote:
>
> > o Support for new platforms: Windows CE, Tandem OSS, A/UX, AIX 64-bit,
> > Linux x86_64, Linux 64-bit on Sparc v9
>
> OpenSSL does no
On Tue, Dec 31, 2002 at 01:34:07AM +0100, Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>
>
> OpenSSL version 0.9.7 released
> ===
Hi,
sorry for the late response but I didn't manage to test earlier :-(
I have two patches attached whi
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Thu, 9 Jan 2003 17:05:12
+0100, Corinna Vinschen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
vinschen> Btw., does anybody have an idea where a symbol ".RC4_end" could come from?
crypto/rc4/asm/rx86unix.cpp in my case (on Linux)...
I've applied your patches, and will commit them
On Thu, Jan 09, 2003 at 05:10:55PM +0100, Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker wrote:
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Thu, 9 Jan 2003 17:05:12
>+0100, Corinna Vinschen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>
> vinschen> Btw., does anybody have an idea where a symbol ".RC4_end" could come from?
>
> crypto/rc4/a
> However, currently I'm unfortunately unable to release a Cygwin net
> version of 0.9.7 due to a linker problem, which results in dropped
> symbols in the link stub library. The most prominent dropped symbol
> is RC4. Building OpenSSH with this libs results in ssh and sshd crashing
> immediately
On Thu, Jan 09, 2003 at 05:34:39PM +0100, Andy Polyakov wrote:
> > Btw., does anybody have an idea where a symbol ".RC4_end" could come from?
>
> I should have an idea... To start which I didn't expect to see .RC4_end
> symbol be visible at all. Assembler should have hidden it as names
> starting
> What I don't understand is the following.
>
> crypto/rc4/Makefile.ssl contains the following:
>
> RC4_ENC=rc4_enc.o
> # or use
> #RC4_ENC=asm/rx86-elf.o
> #RC4_ENC=asm/rx86-out.o
> #RC4_ENC=asm/rx86-sol.o
> #RC4_ENC=asm/rx86bdsi.o
>
> Even though it's supposed to build rc4_enc.o t
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Thu, 09 Jan 2003 17:34:39 +0100, Andy
Polyakov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
appro> > c=`echo $$i | sed 's/^lib\(.*\).dll/cyg\1-$(SHLIB_VERSION_NUMBER).dll/'`;
appro> ^ this of course works, but it probably
appro> should be \., not ju
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Thu, 9 Jan 2003 17:26:12
+0100, Corinna Vinschen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
vinschen> What I don't understand is the following.
vinschen>
vinschen> crypto/rc4/Makefile.ssl contains the following:
vinschen>
vinschen> RC4_ENC=rc4_enc.o
vinschen> # or use
vinsc
On Thu, Jan 09, 2003 at 05:53:57PM +0100, Andy Polyakov wrote:
> As for .*_end symbols. Apparently there're more... Any particular reason
> why are you complaining just about .RC4_end?
No. Just the one I found first due to the ssh crash.
> > Until I found a solution for that linker problem (whic
> > As for .*_end symbols. Apparently there're more... Any particular reason
> > why are you complaining just about .RC4_end?
>
> No. Just the one I found first due to the ssh crash.
>
> > > Until I found a solution for that linker problem (which is a linker bug,
> > > apparently) I'd like to bu
> > > > Until I found a solution for that linker problem (which is a linker bug,
> > > > apparently) I'd like to build the Cygwin version using rc4_enc.o. How
> > > > can I do that most cleanly?
> > >
> > > By fixing rx86-out.o:-) A.
Did it ever work? Assembler support in cygwin-shared build that
> > > > > Until I found a solution for that linker problem (which is a linker bug,
> > > > > apparently) I'd like to build the Cygwin version using rc4_enc.o. How
> > > > > can I do that most cleanly?
> > > >
> > > > By fixing rx86-out.o:-) A.
>
> Did it ever work? Assembler support in cygwin-sha
On Thu, Jan 09, 2003 at 06:25:57PM +0100, Andy Polyakov wrote:
> I meant "be patient:-)" As for details, you should have provided more of
> them:-) At least that you've configured with shared flag and that 'make
> test' fails. In other words something we can *easily* reproduce. Cheers.
Uhm... I th
On Thu, Jan 09, 2003 at 06:32:05PM +0100, Andy Polyakov wrote:
> > > > > Until I found a solution for that linker problem (which is a linker bug,
> > > > > apparently) I'd like to build the Cygwin version using rc4_enc.o. How
> > > > > can I do that most cleanly?
> > > >
> > > > By fixing rx86-out
> And I don't think it's openssl's fault.
Yes, it apparently is... Compile foo(){} with cc -S and note that
compiler add some .def ... .endef line, but not perlasm thing which is
reponsible for assembler code generation.
> I'm going
> to ask some linker experts...
Ask about this .def ... .endef
> > And I don't think it's openssl's fault.
>
> Yes, it apparently is...
Verify that the attached patch solves the problem.
> > I'm going
> > to ask some linker experts...
>
> Ask about this .def ... .endef line. Any documentation available
> on-line?
I found the documentation for .def ... .en
On Thu, Jan 09, 2003 at 10:35:16PM +0100, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> The "2" is just sort of a counter which is needed to allow more than
> [...]
Hi, I have chosen another packaging method:
Version 0.9.6h will consist only of the needed DLLs to link applications
build against it.
The packag
On Thu, Jan 09, 2003 at 08:58:29PM +0100, Andy Polyakov wrote:
> I found the documentation for .def ... .endef, but it doesn't say a
> thing about the values of .scl and .type. So I just copied from an .s
> file generated by compiler. Verify the values with your people.
This is from the gas info p
On Thu, 9 Jan 2003, Andy Polyakov wrote:
> I found the documentation for .def ... .endef, but it doesn't say a
> thing about the values of .scl and .type. So I just copied from an .s
> file generated by compiler. Verify the values with your people.
>
> This is a preliminary patch and I need to th
> > This is a preliminary patch and I need to think it through before I
> > commit it. Maybe we should solve it in some other way (like with ELF).
> > Any DJGPP out there who care to verify if this doesn't break DJGPP?
>
> I tried this patch on DJGPP both as normally compiled and also using
> the
On Sun, 12 Jan 2003, Andy Polyakov wrote:
> > I tried this patch on DJGPP both as normally compiled and also using
> > the asm modules (put ${x86_out_asm} in the DJGPP config-string
> ^^^ Oh! I missed that. I mean the fact that they are not
> actually engaged in the default configura
> > > I tried this patch on DJGPP both as normally compiled and also using
> > > the asm modules (put ${x86_out_asm} in the DJGPP config-string
> > ^^^ Oh! I missed that. I mean the fact that they are not
> > actually engaged in the default configuration. Any particular reason
> > why
On Sun, 12 Jan 2003, Andy Polyakov wrote:
> > > > I tried this patch on DJGPP both as normally compiled and also using
> > > > the asm modules (put ${x86_out_asm} in the DJGPP config-string
> > > ^^^ Oh! I missed that. I mean the fact that they are not
> > > actually engaged in the d
On Fri, Jan 10, 2003 at 07:27:35PM +0100, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> > [...]
> Hi, I have chosen another packaging method:
>
> Version 0.9.6h will consist only of the needed DLLs to link applications
> build against it.
>
> The package will be called
>
> openssl096-0.9.6h-1.tar.bz2
>
>
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Mon, 13 Jan 2003 15:36:40
+0100, Corinna Vinschen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
vinschen> in the meantime I released Cygwin's openssl using the above
vinschen> packaging scheme. Would you mind to revert the cygwin.sh
vinschen> changes? The following patch should do
27 matches
Mail list logo
