Andy Polyakov wrote:
> DES_LONG *can* be 8 bytes, it's just that it can't be 8 if you want to
> deploy des_enc-sparc.S module. As mentioned adding DES_INT in stable
> branch is inappropriate as it may break installations which are opted
> for 64-bit ABI, but started compiling the toolkit with no-asm. So that
> we have to disengage assembler module... Unless evidence is presented
> that SPARC Linux vendors already patch it anyway. A.


Okay understood on the reason to keep things as they are.

To confirm things back "make test" works if you remove the
"des_enc-sparc.o fcrypt_b.o" which appears to make it use the generic C
implementation. So if that change can be updated into the 0.9.8 tree.

Then for the 0.9.9 tree keep the "des_enc-sparc.o fcrypt_b.o" but also
add "DES_INT".

This is for the target "linux64-sparcv9".



Just out of interest what distributions are shipping a native 64bit
Linux SPARC ? From looking over debian 4.0 that is using 0.9.8 by
default is has the "v8" (in /lib/v8/) and the "v8plus" versions (in
/lib/v9/) but there is no 64bit "v9" versions shipped in the /lib64/
directory.

None of the executables shipped with any SPARC distribution I have seen
are 64bit, let alone ones that link with OpenSSL. Only a skeleton
runtime 64bit support is shipped which just means a handful of DSOs and
OpenSSL is not amongst them. Debian 4.0 is the distribution I have
installed.

These number of active Linux SPARC distributions these days might be
down to a tiny handful.

Darryl
__________________________________________________ ____________________
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
Development Mailing List openssl-dev@openssl.org
Automated List Manager majordomo@openssl.org