Richard Levitte [Wed, 25 Sep 2002 13:34:37 +0000 (13:34 +0000)]
It makes more sense to refer to specific function manuals than the concept
manual when the specific function is refered to in the current manual text.
This correction was originally introduced in OpenBSD's tracking of OpenSSL.
Richard Levitte [Wed, 25 Sep 2002 13:26:40 +0000 (13:26 +0000)]
Remove *all* references to RSA_PKCS1_RSAref, since it doesn't exist any more.
This correction was originally introduced in OpenBSD's tracking of OpenSSL.
Richard Levitte [Wed, 25 Sep 2002 13:11:16 +0000 (13:11 +0000)]
It makes more sense to refer to specific function manuals than the concept
manual when the specific function is refered to in the current manual text.
This correction was originally introduced in OpenBSD's tracking of OpenSSL.
Richard Levitte [Sat, 17 Aug 2002 13:46:52 +0000 (13:46 +0000)]
So, I discovered that if you have your $PATH set so a ld different from
GNU ld comes first, checking the usage of collect2 gives that instead of
GNU ld, even if GNU ld would be the one that would get used if we link using
gcc. It's much better, apparently, to ask gcc directly what the path to
GNU ld is (provided it's there at all and gcc knows about it), and ask
the result if it's a GNU or not. The bonus is that our GNU ld detection
mechanism got shorter and easier to understand...
Richard Levitte [Sat, 17 Aug 2002 13:46:42 +0000 (13:46 +0000)]
So, I discovered that if you have your $PATH set so a ld different from
GNU ld comes first, checking the usage of collect2 gives that instead of
GNU ld, even if GNU ld would be the one that would get used if we link using
gcc. It's much better, apparently, to ask gcc directly what the path to
GNU ld is (provided it's there at all and gcc knows about it), and ask
the result if it's a GNU or not. The bonus is that our GNU ld detection
mechanism got shorter and easier to understand...
Richard Levitte [Fri, 16 Aug 2002 09:41:35 +0000 (09:41 +0000)]
isalist was less trustable than I thought (or rather, one can trust it to
come up with all kinds of names we don't have in our targets).
Besides, our sparcv9 targets currently generate sparcv8 code, I'm told.
Richard Levitte [Fri, 16 Aug 2002 09:41:14 +0000 (09:41 +0000)]
isalist was less trustable than I thought (or rather, one can trust it to
come up with all kinds of names we don't have in our targets).
Besides, our sparcv9 targets currently generate sparcv8 code, I'm told.
Richard Levitte [Thu, 15 Aug 2002 09:40:08 +0000 (09:40 +0000)]
Yet a couple of modules forgotten. These weren't important for
OpenSSL itself, since they aren't used there (yet). It became quite
visible qhen building a shared library, however...
Richard Levitte [Thu, 15 Aug 2002 09:39:01 +0000 (09:39 +0000)]
Yet a couple of modules forgotten. These weren't important for
OpenSSL itself, since they aren't used there (yet). It became quite
visible qhen building a shared library, however...
Richard Levitte [Thu, 15 Aug 2002 08:29:26 +0000 (08:29 +0000)]
Sometimes, the value of the variable containing the compiler call can
become rather large. This becomes a problem when the default 1024
character large buffer that WRITE uses isn't enough. WRITE/SYMBOL
uses a 2048 byte large buffer instead.
Richard Levitte [Thu, 15 Aug 2002 08:28:38 +0000 (08:28 +0000)]
Sometimes, the value of the variable containing the compiler call can
become rather large. This becomes a problem when the default 1024
character large buffer that WRITE uses isn't enough. WRITE/SYMBOL
uses a 2048 byte large buffer instead.
Richard Levitte [Wed, 14 Aug 2002 12:18:36 +0000 (12:18 +0000)]
Instead of returning errors when certain flags are unusable, just ignore them.
That will make the test go through even if DH (or in some cases ECDH) aren't
built into OpenSSL.
PR: 216, part 2
Richard Levitte [Wed, 14 Aug 2002 12:16:27 +0000 (12:16 +0000)]
Instead of returning errors when certain flags are unusable, just ignore them.
That will make the test go through even if DH (or in some cases ECDH) aren't
built into OpenSSL.
PR: 216, part 2