On 24/07/18 14:50, Richard Levitte wrote:
> In message <20180724122839.ga2...@roeckx.be> on Tue, 24 Jul 2018 14:28:40
> +0200, Kurt Roeckx said:
>
> kurt> On Tue, Jul 24, 2018 at 02:08:46PM +0200, Richard Levitte wrote:
> kurt> >
> kurt> > The original intention (way back, I think we're even
In message <20180724122839.ga2...@roeckx.be> on Tue, 24 Jul 2018 14:28:40
+0200, Kurt Roeckx said:
kurt> On Tue, Jul 24, 2018 at 02:08:46PM +0200, Richard Levitte wrote:
kurt> >
kurt> > The original intention (way back, I think we're even talking SSLeay
kurt> > time here, but at the very least
On Tue, Jul 24, 2018 at 02:28:40PM +0200, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 24, 2018 at 02:08:46PM +0200, Richard Levitte wrote:
> >
> > The original intention (way back, I think we're even talking SSLeay
> > time here, but at the very least pre-1.0.0 time) was to make a tarball
> > that can be bui
On Tue, Jul 24, 2018 at 02:08:46PM +0200, Richard Levitte wrote:
>
> The original intention (way back, I think we're even talking SSLeay
> time here, but at the very least pre-1.0.0 time) was to make a tarball
> that can be built directly with just a 'make' on any Unix box and
> without requiring
This is a question that's been asked before, and that has popped up
again in https://github.com/openssl/openssl/issues/6765
Our current mechanism for creating tarballs for a new OpenSSL release
is to run 'make dist' in any given build tree... it's a bit clumsy,
as it needs a wasted configuration