Hi Steph,

Didn't see this show up on openssl-dev but that's probably because of the
attachments. In any case, I'll top-post to leave your original email there
(minus attachment) so that it's visible for whoever else wants to know.

FWIW, I had your original post still flagged as "TODO" in my mail-client, it's
just that like many other openssl hackers, windows is not my primary (or even
secondary) environment. In fact, as it happens I haven't touched it at all in
a couple of years but I need to reaquaint myself with it soon for other
reasons, so had planned on taking a look at your stuff then (esp. as it deals
with engine things).

Please ping me personally in a while if you've still not heard anything, but
FWIW this hadn't gone unnoticed, just unprocessed. OTOH if others get to this
before I do then great, but I will try to take a peek some time soon.

Cheers,
Geoff

On Saturday 05 July 2008 19:25:33 Steph Fox wrote:
> Ignore my patches from last week, please. I've now split them down now into
> smaller chunks, added some bits I missed the first time around and checked
> everything I've done against the OpenSSL bug tracker:
>
> - bug #1335 is fixed by the 'engine' patch (no-engine build fails)
> - bug #1704 is fixed by the 'build' patch (/Zi request)
> - bug #1598 should be closed as a duplicate of #153. The changed subject
> for #153 means the earlier report doesn't show up in bug tracker searches
> for ssl3_send_alert - that should probably be altered.
>
> The 'engine' patch also introduces three --enable-* options for items that
> are supposedly disabled by default, and disables them by default. Without
> these changes, no-engine is still broken in mk1mf builds.
>
> The 'build' patch also offers debug makefiles, adds library suffixes to
> differentiate between dynamic/static/release/debug builds, and fixes a
> handful of typos - some of which are *in variable names* - in the VC-32
> makefile generation script.
>
> There are two smaller patches, one of which allows nasm or no-asm to be
> passed as an argument to ms/32all.bat in 0.9.8 or 0.9.9-dev, and the other
> of which fixes an MSVC compile warning (read: build failure) in 0.9.9-dev
> only.
>
> The patches were all created using diff -ur --binary, which forces UNIX
> line endings on all affected files. You may find that you need to run
> patch -p1 --binary when applying them. Note that batch files do NOT need
> CR/LF in order to run under NT-based systems.
>
> I'd like to start work on making the test suite functional for builds with
> configure lines other than 'perl Configure VC-WIN32', but it's a bit
> pointless if nobody on the OpenSSL dev team responds. I didn't even know
> the patches I sent last week wouldn't apply cleanly until I updated my
> openssl snaps to check for intervening changes - and following the
> instructions in the README turns all diff output to DOS, which I'm pretty
> sure isn't the way to go
>
> Thanks,
>
> - Steph
>
> ps This is the second time of sending. The openssl.org mail host doesn't
> like patches this week - hopefully it copes with tar.gz.



--
Un terrien, c'est un singe avec des clefs de char...
__________________________________________________ ____________________
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
Development Mailing List openssl-dev@openssl.org
Automated List Manager majordomo@openssl.org