OpenSSL 1.0.0 beta 1 released

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
18 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

OpenSSL 1.0.0 beta 1 released

OpenSSL-4
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1


  OpenSSL version 1.0.0 Beta 1
  ============================

  OpenSSL - The Open Source toolkit for SSL/TLS
  http://www.openssl.org/

  OpenSSL is currently in a release cycle.  The first beta is now released.
  The beta release is available for download via HTTP and FTP from the
  following master locations (the various FTP mirrors you can find under
  http://www.openssl.org/source/mirror.html):

    o http://www.openssl.org/source/
    o ftp://ftp.openssl.org/source/

  The file names of the beta are:

    o openssl-1.0.0-beta1.tar.gz
      MD5 checksum: 49f265d9dd8dc011788b34768f63313e
      SHA1 checksum: 89b4490b6091b496042b5fe9a2c8a9015326e446

  The checksums were calculated using the following command:

    openssl md5 < openssl-1.0.0-beta1.tar.gz
    openssl sha1 < openssl-1.0.0-beta1.tar.gz

  Please download and test them as soon as possible. This new OpenSSL
  version incorporates 107 documented changes and bugfixes to the
  toolkit (for a complete list see http://www.openssl.org/source/exp/CHANGES).

  Reports and patches should be sent to [hidden email].
  Discussions around the development of OpenSSL should be sent to
  [hidden email].  Anything else should go to
  [hidden email].

  The best way, at least on Unix, to create a report is to do the
  following after configuration:

      make report

  That will do a few basic checks of the compiler and bc, then build
  and run the tests.  The result will appear on screen and in the file
  "testlog".  Please read the report before sending it to us.  There
  may be problems that we can't solve for you, like missing programs.

  Oh and to those who have noticed the date... the joke is that it
  isn't a joke.

  Yours,
  The OpenSSL Project Team...  

    Mark J. Cox             Ben Laurie          Andy Polyakov
    Ralf S. Engelschall     Richard Levitte     Geoff Thorpe
    Dr. Stephen Henson      Bodo Möller Ulf Möller
    Lutz Jänicke            Nils Larsch
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)

iQEVAwUBSdNEV6LSm3vylcdZAQIc4gf+Ki9AQzfwES4Up5QRKJCONzIvgIzHpajQ
laGz0L6QQXcMrSrLxubSMfYnnXqX/BfY67C28dLaefEK9xygZMxvbS5d56hm3+3m
SWLWXqHsCrxp4LWm3Kr7senmhBl06LCTYX1AC2VP0ph/UfouQPu15UkuMCt6eDV7
SEUkYDk6TA8Wr7C0nMHnTOQdqx6r/N7OnPEaCCWkMzsMC5KxTkCP9/SGrDam29dt
xV6P5+AntSgNbr9tXYAiQHgMvut9o1O8pTaGdlv2TJ/Ua2ynvmd8hsaO7Ptl3Tpt
Bkaghk+rV3qZgLzWAiHjeebEWyXTSGvMPKM6r5mi8vrqjfbSF4zUKA==
=qESg
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
______________________________________________________________________
OpenSSL Project                                 http://www.openssl.org
Development Mailing List                       [hidden email]
Automated List Manager                           [hidden email]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: OpenSSL 1.0.0 beta 1 released

Michael Tuexen-4
Dear OpenSSL Project Team,

are the DTLS related patches sent by Robin incorporated?

The patches have been reviewed by the original author of
the DTLS implementation and his comments have been incorporated.
We also have successfully done an intop test with Certicom.

Best regards
Michael

On Apr 1, 2009, at 12:02 PM, OpenSSL wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
>
>  OpenSSL version 1.0.0 Beta 1
>  ============================
>
>  OpenSSL - The Open Source toolkit for SSL/TLS
>  http://www.openssl.org/
>
>  OpenSSL is currently in a release cycle.  The first beta is now  
> released.
>  The beta release is available for download via HTTP and FTP from the
>  following master locations (the various FTP mirrors you can find  
> under
>  http://www.openssl.org/source/mirror.html):
>
>    o http://www.openssl.org/source/
>    o ftp://ftp.openssl.org/source/
>
>  The file names of the beta are:
>
>    o openssl-1.0.0-beta1.tar.gz
>      MD5 checksum: 49f265d9dd8dc011788b34768f63313e
>      SHA1 checksum: 89b4490b6091b496042b5fe9a2c8a9015326e446
>
>  The checksums were calculated using the following command:
>
>    openssl md5 < openssl-1.0.0-beta1.tar.gz
>    openssl sha1 < openssl-1.0.0-beta1.tar.gz
>
>  Please download and test them as soon as possible. This new OpenSSL
>  version incorporates 107 documented changes and bugfixes to the
>  toolkit (for a complete list see http://www.openssl.org/source/exp/CHANGES)
> .
>
>  Reports and patches should be sent to [hidden email].
>  Discussions around the development of OpenSSL should be sent to
>  [hidden email].  Anything else should go to
>  [hidden email].
>
>  The best way, at least on Unix, to create a report is to do the
>  following after configuration:
>
>      make report
>
>  That will do a few basic checks of the compiler and bc, then build
>  and run the tests.  The result will appear on screen and in the file
>  "testlog".  Please read the report before sending it to us.  There
>  may be problems that we can't solve for you, like missing programs.
>
>  Oh and to those who have noticed the date... the joke is that it
>  isn't a joke.
>
>  Yours,
>  The OpenSSL Project Team...
>
>    Mark J. Cox             Ben Laurie          Andy Polyakov
>    Ralf S. Engelschall     Richard Levitte     Geoff Thorpe
>    Dr. Stephen Henson      Bodo Möller Ulf Möller
>    Lutz Jänicke            Nils Larsch
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
>
> iQEVAwUBSdNEV6LSm3vylcdZAQIc4gf+Ki9AQzfwES4Up5QRKJCONzIvgIzHpajQ
> laGz0L6QQXcMrSrLxubSMfYnnXqX/BfY67C28dLaefEK9xygZMxvbS5d56hm3+3m
> SWLWXqHsCrxp4LWm3Kr7senmhBl06LCTYX1AC2VP0ph/UfouQPu15UkuMCt6eDV7
> SEUkYDk6TA8Wr7C0nMHnTOQdqx6r/N7OnPEaCCWkMzsMC5KxTkCP9/SGrDam29dt
> xV6P5+AntSgNbr9tXYAiQHgMvut9o1O8pTaGdlv2TJ/Ua2ynvmd8hsaO7Ptl3Tpt
> Bkaghk+rV3qZgLzWAiHjeebEWyXTSGvMPKM6r5mi8vrqjfbSF4zUKA==
> =qESg
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> ______________________________________________________________________
> OpenSSL Project                                 http://www.openssl.org
> Development Mailing List                       [hidden email]
> Automated List Manager                           [hidden email]
>

______________________________________________________________________
OpenSSL Project                                 http://www.openssl.org
Development Mailing List                       [hidden email]
Automated List Manager                           [hidden email]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: OpenSSL 1.0.0 beta 1 released

Dr. Stephen Henson
On Wed, Apr 01, 2009, Michael Txen wrote:

> Dear OpenSSL Project Team,
>
> are the DTLS related patches sent by Robin incorporated?
>
> The patches have been reviewed by the original author of
> the DTLS implementation and his comments have been incorporated.
> We also have successfully done an intop test with Certicom.
>

No they haven't yet. I started looking at a few relevant tickets PR#1827,
PR#1828 are broken patches, looks like line-wrap issues. PR#1829 I'm not sure
about: how portable is gettimeofday()?

Please update tickets with working patches against 1.0.0-beta1.

Steve.
--
Dr Stephen N. Henson. Email, S/MIME and PGP keys: see homepage
OpenSSL project core developer and freelance consultant.
Homepage: http://www.drh-consultancy.demon.co.uk
______________________________________________________________________
OpenSSL Project                                 http://www.openssl.org
Development Mailing List                       [hidden email]
Automated List Manager                           [hidden email]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: OpenSSL 1.0.0 beta 1 released

Peter Sylvester-3
In reply to this post by OpenSSL-4
OpenSSL wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
>
>   OpenSSL version 1.0.0 Beta 1
>   ============================

>   Please download and test them as soon as possible. This new OpenSSL
>   version incorporates 107 documented changes and bugfixes to the
>   toolkit (for a complete list see http://www.openssl.org/source/exp/CHANGES).
>
>  

Would it be possible to review the 517 "NEW" problems in the rt
database. some of the non-assigned ones are already 6 years old.
I think that many of the remarks are probably now obsolete and
only pollute the database. some real problems and, in particular,
proposed patches are totally hidden.

Personally I have a few reports, and some are in reality
"treated/fixed"

TIA for consideration.
______________________________________________________________________
OpenSSL Project                                 http://www.openssl.org
Development Mailing List                       [hidden email]
Automated List Manager                           [hidden email]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[openssl.org #1884] OpenSSL 1.0.0 beta 1 failure on RH7

Rich Salz via RT
In reply to this post by OpenSSL-4
Hi there,

On Wed, 1 Apr 2009, OpenSSL wrote:

> ...
>   The beta release is available for download via HTTP and FTP
> ...
>   Please download and test them as soon as possible.
> ...
>   Reports and patches should be sent to [hidden email].

Here are the results from a few of our machines:

testlog.gale Slack 10
testlog.hurricane Slack 9
testlog.laptop Debian 5
testlog.lightning Debian 5
testlog.mail3 RH 9
testlog.mail4 Slack 10
testlog.palatine Debian 5
testlog.portakabin2 Slack 12
testlog.tech Slack 12
testlog.tornado Debian 5
testlog.www2 RH 7 - I keep it kicking around for
                                 just this sort of thing. :)

Please get in touch if you need any more information.

73,
Ged.

tests.tgz (3K) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: OpenSSL 1.0.0 beta 1 released

Michael Tuexen-4
In reply to this post by Dr. Stephen Henson
Hi Steve,

Robin will port all the patches from
http://sctp.fh-muenster.de/dtls-patches.html
to the beta version when he is back from vacation
early next week.

Regarding gettimeofday(): It is pretty common on Unix
systems, not sure about Windows. But we can use any
other function which allows us to get the current time.
Any preferences?

Best regards
Michael

On Apr 1, 2009, at 2:09 PM, Dr. Stephen Henson wrote:

> On Wed, Apr 01, 2009, Michael Txen wrote:
>
>> Dear OpenSSL Project Team,
>>
>> are the DTLS related patches sent by Robin incorporated?
>>
>> The patches have been reviewed by the original author of
>> the DTLS implementation and his comments have been incorporated.
>> We also have successfully done an intop test with Certicom.
>>
>
> No they haven't yet. I started looking at a few relevant tickets  
> PR#1827,
> PR#1828 are broken patches, looks like line-wrap issues. PR#1829 I'm  
> not sure
> about: how portable is gettimeofday()?
>
> Please update tickets with working patches against 1.0.0-beta1.
>
> Steve.
> --
> Dr Stephen N. Henson. Email, S/MIME and PGP keys: see homepage
> OpenSSL project core developer and freelance consultant.
> Homepage: http://www.drh-consultancy.demon.co.uk
> ______________________________________________________________________
> OpenSSL Project                                 http://www.openssl.org
> Development Mailing List                       [hidden email]
> Automated List Manager                           [hidden email]
>

______________________________________________________________________
OpenSSL Project                                 http://www.openssl.org
Development Mailing List                       [hidden email]
Automated List Manager                           [hidden email]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: OpenSSL 1.0.0 beta 1 released

Dr. Stephen Henson
On Thu, Apr 02, 2009, Michael Txen wrote:

>
> Regarding gettimeofday(): It is pretty common on Unix
> systems, not sure about Windows. But we can use any
> other function which allows us to get the current time.
> Any preferences?
>

Well basically anything that works on all the plethora of platforms OpenSSL
supports ;-)

apps/speed.c uses various techniques which might be usable here.

Steve.
--
Dr Stephen N. Henson. Email, S/MIME and PGP keys: see homepage
OpenSSL project core developer and freelance consultant.
Homepage: http://www.drh-consultancy.demon.co.uk
______________________________________________________________________
OpenSSL Project                                 http://www.openssl.org
Development Mailing List                       [hidden email]
Automated List Manager                           [hidden email]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: OpenSSL 1.0.0 beta 1 released

Kyle Hamilton
In reply to this post by Michael Tuexen-4
I'd prefer that IBM release whatever library they're using to identify
and handle Julian days. ;)

-Kyle H

On Thu, Apr 2, 2009 at 12:17 PM, Michael Tüxen
<[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hi Steve,
>
> Robin will port all the patches from
> http://sctp.fh-muenster.de/dtls-patches.html
> to the beta version when he is back from vacation
> early next week.
>
> Regarding gettimeofday(): It is pretty common on Unix
> systems, not sure about Windows. But we can use any
> other function which allows us to get the current time.
> Any preferences?
>
> Best regards
> Michael
>
> On Apr 1, 2009, at 2:09 PM, Dr. Stephen Henson wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Apr 01, 2009, Michael Txen wrote:
>>
>>> Dear OpenSSL Project Team,
>>>
>>> are the DTLS related patches sent by Robin incorporated?
>>>
>>> The patches have been reviewed by the original author of
>>> the DTLS implementation and his comments have been incorporated.
>>> We also have successfully done an intop test with Certicom.
>>>
>>
>> No they haven't yet. I started looking at a few relevant tickets PR#1827,
>> PR#1828 are broken patches, looks like line-wrap issues. PR#1829 I'm not
>> sure
>> about: how portable is gettimeofday()?
>>
>> Please update tickets with working patches against 1.0.0-beta1.
>>
>> Steve.
>> --
>> Dr Stephen N. Henson. Email, S/MIME and PGP keys: see homepage
>> OpenSSL project core developer and freelance consultant.
>> Homepage: http://www.drh-consultancy.demon.co.uk
>> ______________________________________________________________________
>> OpenSSL Project                                 http://www.openssl.org
>> Development Mailing List                       [hidden email]
>> Automated List Manager                           [hidden email]
>>
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> OpenSSL Project                                 http://www.openssl.org
> Development Mailing List                       [hidden email]
> Automated List Manager                           [hidden email]
>
______________________________________________________________________
OpenSSL Project                                 http://www.openssl.org
Development Mailing List                       [hidden email]
Automated List Manager                           [hidden email]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: OpenSSL 1.0.0 beta 1 released

Michael Tuexen-4
In reply to this post by Dr. Stephen Henson
Hi Steve,

thanks for the pointer.

Best regards
Michael

On Apr 2, 2009, at 9:34 PM, Dr. Stephen Henson wrote:

> On Thu, Apr 02, 2009, Michael Txen wrote:
>
>>
>> Regarding gettimeofday(): It is pretty common on Unix
>> systems, not sure about Windows. But we can use any
>> other function which allows us to get the current time.
>> Any preferences?
>>
>
> Well basically anything that works on all the plethora of platforms  
> OpenSSL
> supports ;-)
>
> apps/speed.c uses various techniques which might be usable here.
>
> Steve.
> --
> Dr Stephen N. Henson. Email, S/MIME and PGP keys: see homepage
> OpenSSL project core developer and freelance consultant.
> Homepage: http://www.drh-consultancy.demon.co.uk
> ______________________________________________________________________
> OpenSSL Project                                 http://www.openssl.org
> Development Mailing List                       [hidden email]
> Automated List Manager                           [hidden email]
>

______________________________________________________________________
OpenSSL Project                                 http://www.openssl.org
Development Mailing List                       [hidden email]
Automated List Manager                           [hidden email]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: OpenSSL 1.0.0 beta 1 released

Eric Norman
In reply to this post by Kyle Hamilton

On Apr 2, 2009, at 3:13 PM, Kyle Hamilton wrote:

> I'd prefer that IBM release whatever library they're using to identify
> and handle Julian days. ;)

In case y'all didn't know, converting to/from Julian days is simple.  
See

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julian_day
or
    http://www.tondering.dk/claus/calendar.html
or
    http://aa.usno.navy.mil/faq/docs/JD_Formula.php
or ...

Eric Norman

______________________________________________________________________
OpenSSL Project                                 http://www.openssl.org
Development Mailing List                       [hidden email]
Automated List Manager                           [hidden email]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: OpenSSL 1.0.0 beta 1 released

Dr. Stephen Henson
On Thu, Apr 02, 2009, Eric Norman wrote:

>
> On Apr 2, 2009, at 3:13 PM, Kyle Hamilton wrote:
>
>> I'd prefer that IBM release whatever library they're using to identify
>> and handle Julian days. ;)
>
> In case y'all didn't know, converting to/from Julian days is simple.  See
>
>    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julian_day
> or
>    http://www.tondering.dk/claus/calendar.html
> or
>    http://aa.usno.navy.mil/faq/docs/JD_Formula.php
> or ...
>

There is in fact some code already in 1.0.0 which handles Julian days: it is
used to avoid the date wraparound issues present on previous versions of
OpenSSL when a certificate expiry date is being calculated.

Steve.
--
Dr Stephen N. Henson. Email, S/MIME and PGP keys: see homepage
OpenSSL project core developer and freelance consultant.
Homepage: http://www.drh-consultancy.demon.co.uk
______________________________________________________________________
OpenSSL Project                                 http://www.openssl.org
Development Mailing List                       [hidden email]
Automated List Manager                           [hidden email]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: OpenSSL 1.0.0 beta 1 released - build fail on Solaris 2.5.1

Ted Mittelstaedt
In reply to this post by OpenSSL-4
This is from /openssl-SNAP-20090405 on Solaris x86 ver 2.5.1 using
gcc 2.95.3:

gcc -I.. -I../.. -I../asn1 -I../evp -I../../include -fPIC -DOPENSSL_PIC
-DOPENSSL_THREADS -D_REENTRANT -DDSO_DLFCN -DHAVE_DLFCN_H -O3
-fomit-frame-pointer -march=pentium -Wall -DL_ENDIAN
-DOPENSSL_NO_INLINE_ASM -DOPENSSL_BN_ASM_PART_WORDS
-DOPENSSL_BN_ASM_MONT -DSHA1_ASM -DSHA256_ASM -DSHA512_ASM -DMD5_ASM
-DRMD160_ASM -DAES_ASM -DWHIRLPOOL_ASM
-R/usr/local/lib:/usr/local/ssl/lib -c -o wp-mmx.o wp-mmx.s
Assembler: wp-mmx.s
         aline 29        : Illegal mnemonic
         aline 29        : syntax error
         aline 29        : Illegal register
         aline 30        : Illegal mnemonic
         aline 30        : syntax error
         aline 30        : Illegal register
         aline 31        : Illegal mnemonic
         aline 31        : syntax error
         aline 31        : Illegal register
         aline 32        : Illegal mnemonic
         aline 32        : syntax error
         aline 32        : Illegal register
         aline 33        : Illegal mnemonic
         aline 33        : syntax error
         aline 33        : Illegal register
         aline 34        : Illegal mnemonic
         aline 34        : syntax error
         aline 34        : Illegal register
         aline 35        : Illegal mnemonic
         aline 35        : syntax error
         aline 35        : Illegal register
         aline 36        : Illegal mnemonic
         aline 36        : syntax error
         aline 36        : Illegal register
         aline 38        : Illegal mnemonic
         aline 38        : syntax error
         aline 38        : Illegal register
         aline 39        : Illegal mnemonic
         aline 39        : syntax error
         aline 39        : Illegal register
         aline 40        : Illegal mnemonic
Too many errors - Goodbye
*** Error code 1
make: Fatal error: Command failed for target `wp-mmx.o'
Current working directory
/usr/home/tedm/openssl-SNAP-20090405/crypto/whrlpool
*** Error code 1
make: Fatal error: Command failed for target `subdirs'
Current working directory /usr/home/tedm/openssl-SNAP-20090405/crypto
*** Error code 1
make: Fatal error: Command failed for target `build_crypto'


I then tried it with the "no-asm" parameter to config and it got further
but blew up here:

gcc -I.. -I../.. -I../asn1 -I../evp -I../../include -fPIC -DOPENSSL_PIC
-DOPENSSL_THREADS -D_REENTRANT -DDSO_DLFCN -DHAVE_DLFCN_H -O3
-fomit-frame-pointer -march=pentium -Wall -DL_ENDIAN
-DOPENSSL_NO_INLINE_ASM -R/usr/local/lib:/usr/local/ssl/lib  -c  camellia.c
Assembler: camellia.c
         aline 1067      : Illegal mnemonic
         aline 1067      : syntax error
         aline 1073      : Illegal mnemonic
         aline 1073      : syntax error
         aline 1079      : Illegal mnemonic
         aline 1079      : syntax error
         aline 1085      : Illegal mnemonic
         aline 1085      : syntax error
         aline 1092      : Illegal mnemonic
         aline 1092      : syntax error
         aline 1098      : Illegal mnemonic
         aline 1098      : syntax error
         aline 1117      : Illegal mnemonic
         aline 1117      : syntax error
         aline 1124      : Illegal mnemonic
         aline 1124      : syntax error
         aline 2155      : Illegal mnemonic
         aline 2155      : syntax error
         aline 2162      : Illegal mnemonic
         aline 2162      : syntax error
         aline 2169      : Illegal mnemonic
         aline 2169      : syntax error
         aline 2176      : Illegal mnemonic
         aline 2176      : syntax error
         aline 2518      : Illegal mnemonic
         aline 2518      : syntax error
         aline 2525      : Illegal mnemonic
         aline 2525      : syntax error
         aline 2530      : Illegal mnemonic
         aline 2530      : syntax error
         aline 2535      : Illegal mnemonic
Too many errors - Goodbye
*** Error code 1
make: Fatal error: Command failed for target `camellia.o'
Current working directory
/usr/home/tedm/openssl-SNAP-20090405/crypto/camellia
*** Error code 1
make: Fatal error: Command failed for target `subdirs'
Current working directory /usr/home/tedm/openssl-SNAP-20090405/crypto
*** Error code 1
make: Fatal error: Command failed for target `build_crypto'
#

Ted


OpenSSL wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
>
>   OpenSSL version 1.0.0 Beta 1
>   ============================
>
>   OpenSSL - The Open Source toolkit for SSL/TLS
>   http://www.openssl.org/
>
>   OpenSSL is currently in a release cycle.  The first beta is now released.
>   The beta release is available for download via HTTP and FTP from the
>   following master locations (the various FTP mirrors you can find under
>   http://www.openssl.org/source/mirror.html):
>
>     o http://www.openssl.org/source/
>     o ftp://ftp.openssl.org/source/
>
>   The file names of the beta are:
>
>     o openssl-1.0.0-beta1.tar.gz
>       MD5 checksum: 49f265d9dd8dc011788b34768f63313e
>       SHA1 checksum: 89b4490b6091b496042b5fe9a2c8a9015326e446
>
>   The checksums were calculated using the following command:
>
>     openssl md5 < openssl-1.0.0-beta1.tar.gz
>     openssl sha1 < openssl-1.0.0-beta1.tar.gz
>
>   Please download and test them as soon as possible. This new OpenSSL
>   version incorporates 107 documented changes and bugfixes to the
>   toolkit (for a complete list see http://www.openssl.org/source/exp/CHANGES).
>
>   Reports and patches should be sent to [hidden email].
>   Discussions around the development of OpenSSL should be sent to
>   [hidden email].  Anything else should go to
>   [hidden email].
>
>   The best way, at least on Unix, to create a report is to do the
>   following after configuration:
>
>       make report
>
>   That will do a few basic checks of the compiler and bc, then build
>   and run the tests.  The result will appear on screen and in the file
>   "testlog".  Please read the report before sending it to us.  There
>   may be problems that we can't solve for you, like missing programs.
>
>   Oh and to those who have noticed the date... the joke is that it
>   isn't a joke.
>
>   Yours,
>   The OpenSSL Project Team...  
>
>     Mark J. Cox             Ben Laurie          Andy Polyakov
>     Ralf S. Engelschall     Richard Levitte     Geoff Thorpe
>     Dr. Stephen Henson      Bodo Möller Ulf Möller
>     Lutz Jänicke            Nils Larsch
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
>
> iQEVAwUBSdNEV6LSm3vylcdZAQIc4gf+Ki9AQzfwES4Up5QRKJCONzIvgIzHpajQ
> laGz0L6QQXcMrSrLxubSMfYnnXqX/BfY67C28dLaefEK9xygZMxvbS5d56hm3+3m
> SWLWXqHsCrxp4LWm3Kr7senmhBl06LCTYX1AC2VP0ph/UfouQPu15UkuMCt6eDV7
> SEUkYDk6TA8Wr7C0nMHnTOQdqx6r/N7OnPEaCCWkMzsMC5KxTkCP9/SGrDam29dt
> xV6P5+AntSgNbr9tXYAiQHgMvut9o1O8pTaGdlv2TJ/Ua2ynvmd8hsaO7Ptl3Tpt
> Bkaghk+rV3qZgLzWAiHjeebEWyXTSGvMPKM6r5mi8vrqjfbSF4zUKA==
> =qESg
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> ______________________________________________________________________
> OpenSSL Project                                 http://www.openssl.org
> User Support Mailing List                    [hidden email]
> Automated List Manager                           [hidden email]

______________________________________________________________________
OpenSSL Project                                 http://www.openssl.org
Development Mailing List                       [hidden email]
Automated List Manager                           [hidden email]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: OpenSSL 1.0.0 beta 1 released - build fail on Solaris 2.5.1

Thor Lancelot Simon-2
On Sun, Apr 05, 2009 at 09:40:36PM -0700, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
> This is from /openssl-SNAP-20090405 on Solaris x86 ver 2.5.1 using
> gcc 2.95.3:

Ow!  Solaris 2.5.1, and gcc2?

Didn't Sun even finally end all support for Solaris 2.5?

Thor
______________________________________________________________________
OpenSSL Project                                 http://www.openssl.org
Development Mailing List                       [hidden email]
Automated List Manager                           [hidden email]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: OpenSSL 1.0.0 beta 1 released - build fail on Solaris 2.5.1

Ted Mittelstaedt
Thor Lancelot Simon wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 05, 2009 at 09:40:36PM -0700, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
>> This is from /openssl-SNAP-20090405 on Solaris x86 ver 2.5.1 using
>> gcc 2.95.3:
>
> Ow!  Solaris 2.5.1, and gcc2?
>
> Didn't Sun even finally end all support for Solaris 2.5?
>

There are trivial differences between Solaris 2.5.1 and the later
Solaris versions.  Not enough to cause a build problem.  So if
it's busted on 2.5.1 it will be busted on 2.6, 2.7 etc.  Plus, that
illegal mnemonic error has happened before and been corrected
before in openssl.  Finally, compilation with "no-asm" means NO
ASSEMBLY, NONE, NADA!!!  While you might be able to argue
obsolescense on the first compile, the second compile with no-asm
defined shouldn't have errored.  Obviously, whoever coded wp-mmx
wasn't paying attention to -DOPENSSL_NO_INLINE_ASM.  Not to mention
the larger question of why wp-mmx was even selected - not all Intel
chips HAVE mmx instructions.

It's obviously a bug.  Whether it's easy to fix or not I don't know.
But clearly, if OpenSSL is going to decide to stop supporting things
then it should be documented.

OpenSSL 0.9.8j runs fine on this platform.

Ted
______________________________________________________________________
OpenSSL Project                                 http://www.openssl.org
Development Mailing List                       [hidden email]
Automated List Manager                           [hidden email]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: OpenSSL 1.0.0 beta 1 released - build fail on Solaris 2.5.1

Andy Polyakov
> There are trivial differences between Solaris 2.5.1 and the later
> Solaris versions.  Not enough to cause a build problem.  So if
> it's busted on 2.5.1 it will be busted on 2.6, 2.7 etc.

Newer Solaris version *are* equipped with newer assembler, which *does*
support more x86 instructions, such as those used in wp-mmx module.

> Plus, that
> illegal mnemonic error has happened before and been corrected
> before in openssl.

You must be referring to "illegal mnemonic" mentioned in Configure in
"Solaris x86 with GNU C setups" section. For completeness sake it should
be noted that newer GNU C versions (or one(s) provided by Sun?) do not
exhibit this behavior and it's perfectly possible to compile without
NO_INLINE_ASM.

In other words, failure to compile on Solaris 2.5.1 and gcc 2.95.3 does
not necessarily mean that it shall fail to compile on later versions. I
mean the opening statement does not hold true:-)

> Finally, compilation with "no-asm" means NO
> ASSEMBLY, NONE, NADA!!!  While you might be able to argue
> obsolescense on the first compile, the second compile with no-asm
> defined shouldn't have errored.

Correct, it shouldn't have failed. In other words this is bug.
http://cvs.openssl.org/chngview?cn=17985 is the cure.

> Obviously, whoever coded wp-mmx
> wasn't paying attention to -DOPENSSL_NO_INLINE_ASM.  Not to mention
> the larger question of why wp-mmx was even selected - not all Intel
> chips HAVE mmx instructions.

What does pure assembler wp-mmx have to do with NO_INLINE_ASM? In either
case, MMX capability is detected at run-time and whirlpool_block_mmx is
*not* invoked on CPU not capable to execute it. This naturally implies
that there *is* equivalent non-mmx code. This applies to all
MMX/SSE/SSE2 modules. This is totally intentional, i.e. this is not a
bug. One can argue that there should be a way to selectively disable
"strange" modules [for impaired assemblers' sake], but where would one
draw the line? This is more of rhetorical question, because as long as
no-asm does the trick, the line is drawn right there. If you're not
satisfied with this all-or-nothing option, feel free to remove
wp_block.o wp-mmx.o from $x86_asm in Configure. Or install GNU binutils
(so that you get more up-to-date assembler) and reconfigure compiler to
use GNU assembler and not Solaris one... A.
______________________________________________________________________
OpenSSL Project                                 http://www.openssl.org
Development Mailing List                       [hidden email]
Automated List Manager                           [hidden email]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: OpenSSL 1.0.0 beta 1 released - build fail on Solaris 2.5.1

Ted Mittelstaedt
Andy Polyakov wrote:
>> There are trivial differences between Solaris 2.5.1 and the later
>> Solaris versions.  Not enough to cause a build problem.  So if
>> it's busted on 2.5.1 it will be busted on 2.6, 2.7 etc.
>>    
>
> Newer Solaris version *are* equipped with newer assembler, which *does*
> support more x86 instructions, such as those used in wp-mmx module.
>
>  
OK.

>> Plus, that
>> illegal mnemonic error has happened before and been corrected
>> before in openssl.
>>    
>
> You must be referring to "illegal mnemonic" mentioned in Configure in
> "Solaris x86 with GNU C setups" section. For completeness sake it should
> be noted that newer GNU C versions (or one(s) provided by Sun?) do not
> exhibit this behavior and it's perfectly possible to compile without
> NO_INLINE_ASM.
>
>  
However, the newer gcc took out the hack to make assembler work with
Sun's linker
so there's another hack you have to do to get it to compile with gcc
3.x  (it's documented
in the FAQ for openssl I recall)

> In other words, failure to compile on Solaris 2.5.1 and gcc 2.95.3 does
> not necessarily mean that it shall fail to compile on later versions. I
> mean the opening statement does not hold true:-)
>
>  

OK, point taken.  Obsolescense, then.

>> Finally, compilation with "no-asm" means NO
>> ASSEMBLY, NONE, NADA!!!  While you might be able to argue
>> obsolescense on the first compile, the second compile with no-asm
>> defined shouldn't have errored.
>>    
>
> Correct, it shouldn't have failed. In other words this is bug.
> http://cvs.openssl.org/chngview?cn=17985 is the cure.
>
>  
Thanks!  I'll try out tomorrow's snap and let you all know.

>> Obviously, whoever coded wp-mmx
>> wasn't paying attention to -DOPENSSL_NO_INLINE_ASM.  Not to mention
>> the larger question of why wp-mmx was even selected - not all Intel
>> chips HAVE mmx instructions.
>>    
>
> What does pure assembler wp-mmx have to do with NO_INLINE_ASM? In either
> case, MMX capability is detected at run-time and whirlpool_block_mmx is
> *not* invoked on CPU not capable to execute it. This naturally implies
> that there *is* equivalent non-mmx code. This applies to all
> MMX/SSE/SSE2 modules. This is totally intentional, i.e. this is not a
> bug. One can argue that there should be a way to selectively disable
> "strange" modules [for impaired assemblers' sake], but where would one
> draw the line? This is more of rhetorical question, because as long as
> no-asm does the trick, the line is drawn right there.

That does it for me - no-asm is just fine.  Nobody would seriously use
an obsolete
platform to do a lot of intense crypto on, so the slower speed that
no-asm introduces
is not a problem.  But lots of people would like to continue to update
the ssh
daemon on their obsolete platforms.

>  If you're not
> satisfied with this all-or-nothing option, feel free to remove
> wp_block.o wp-mmx.o from $x86_asm in Configure.
I might try that just to see what happens.

Thanks!

Ted
>  Or install GNU binutils
> (so that you get more up-to-date assembler) and reconfigure compiler to
> use GNU assembler and not Solaris one... A.
> ______________________________________________________________________
> OpenSSL Project                                 http://www.openssl.org
> Development Mailing List                       [hidden email]
> Automated List Manager                           [hidden email]
>  

______________________________________________________________________
OpenSSL Project                                 http://www.openssl.org
Development Mailing List                       [hidden email]
Automated List Manager                           [hidden email]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: OpenSSL 1.0.0 beta 1 released - build fail on Solaris 2.5.1

Ted Mittelstaedt
In reply to this post by Andy Polyakov
Andy Polyakov wrote:

>> There are trivial differences between Solaris 2.5.1 and the later
>> Solaris versions.  Not enough to cause a build problem.  So if
>> it's busted on 2.5.1 it will be busted on 2.6, 2.7 etc.
>
> Newer Solaris version *are* equipped with newer assembler, which *does*
> support more x86 instructions, such as those used in wp-mmx module.
>
>> Plus, that
>> illegal mnemonic error has happened before and been corrected
>> before in openssl.
>
> You must be referring to "illegal mnemonic" mentioned in Configure in
> "Solaris x86 with GNU C setups" section. For completeness sake it should
> be noted that newer GNU C versions (or one(s) provided by Sun?) do not
> exhibit this behavior and it's perfectly possible to compile without
> NO_INLINE_ASM.
>
> In other words, failure to compile on Solaris 2.5.1 and gcc 2.95.3 does
> not necessarily mean that it shall fail to compile on later versions. I
> mean the opening statement does not hold true:-)
>
>> Finally, compilation with "no-asm" means NO
>> ASSEMBLY, NONE, NADA!!!  While you might be able to argue
>> obsolescense on the first compile, the second compile with no-asm
>> defined shouldn't have errored.
>
> Correct, it shouldn't have failed. In other words this is bug.
> http://cvs.openssl.org/chngview?cn=17985 is the cure.
>
>> Obviously, whoever coded wp-mmx
>> wasn't paying attention to -DOPENSSL_NO_INLINE_ASM.  Not to mention
>> the larger question of why wp-mmx was even selected - not all Intel
>> chips HAVE mmx instructions.
>
> What does pure assembler wp-mmx have to do with NO_INLINE_ASM? In either
> case, MMX capability is detected at run-time and whirlpool_block_mmx is
> *not* invoked on CPU not capable to execute it. This naturally implies
> that there *is* equivalent non-mmx code. This applies to all
> MMX/SSE/SSE2 modules. This is totally intentional, i.e. this is not a
> bug. One can argue that there should be a way to selectively disable
> "strange" modules [for impaired assemblers' sake], but where would one
> draw the line? This is more of rhetorical question, because as long as
> no-asm does the trick, the line is drawn right there. If you're not
> satisfied with this all-or-nothing option, feel free to remove
> wp_block.o wp-mmx.o from $x86_asm in Configure. Or install GNU binutils
> (so that you get more up-to-date assembler) and reconfigure compiler to
> use GNU assembler and not Solaris one... A.
> ______________________________________________________________________
> OpenSSL Project                                 http://www.openssl.org
> Development Mailing List                       [hidden email]
> Automated List Manager                           [hidden email]

Hi All!

   It's building now, but I'm getting a few messages from netdb.h
like the following:

gcc -I.. -I../.. -I../asn1 -I../evp -I../../include -fPIC -DOPENSSL_PIC
-DOPENSSL_THREADS -D_REENTRANT -DDSO_DLFCN -DHAVE_DLFCN_H -O3
-fomit-frame-pointer -march=pentium -Wall -DL_ENDIAN
-DOPENSSL_NO_INLINE_ASM  -c  b_sock.c
In file included from ../../e_os.h:570,
                  from ../cryptlib.h:65,
                  from b_sock.c:63:
/usr/include/netdb.h:195: warning: `struct sockaddr_in' declared inside
parameter list
/usr/include/netdb.h:195: warning: its scope is only this definition or
declaration, which is probably not what you want.

gcc -I.. -I../.. -I../asn1 -I../evp -I../../include -fPIC -DOPENSSL_PIC
-DOPENSSL_THREADS -D_REENTRANT -DDSO_DLFCN -DHAVE_DLFCN_H -O3
-fomit-frame-pointer -march=pentium -Wall -DL_ENDIAN
-DOPENSSL_NO_INLINE_ASM  -c  bss_acpt.c
In file included from ../../e_os.h:570,
                  from ../cryptlib.h:65,
                  from bss_acpt.c:62:
/usr/include/netdb.h:195: warning: `struct sockaddr_in' declared inside
parameter list
/usr/include/netdb.h:195: warning: its scope is only this definition or
declaration, which is probably not what you want.


gcc -I.. -I../.. -I../asn1 -I../evp -I../../include -fPIC -DOPENSSL_PIC
-DOPENSSL_THREADS -D_REENTRANT -DDSO_DLFCN -DHAVE_DLFCN_H -O3
-fomit-frame-pointer -march=pentium -Wall -DL_ENDIAN
-DOPENSSL_NO_INLINE_ASM  -c  bss_dgram.c
In file included from ../../e_os.h:570,
                  from ../cryptlib.h:65,
                  from bss_dgram.c:65:
/usr/include/netdb.h:195: warning: `struct sockaddr_in' declared inside
parameter list
/usr/include/netdb.h:195: warning: its scope is only this definition or
declaration, which is probably not what you want.

Ted
______________________________________________________________________
OpenSSL Project                                 http://www.openssl.org
Development Mailing List                       [hidden email]
Automated List Manager                           [hidden email]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[openssl.org #1884] OpenSSL 1.0.0 beta 1 failure on RH7

Rich Salz via RT
In reply to this post by OpenSSL-4
Very old release, No doubt fixed by now. Closing ticket.

______________________________________________________________________
OpenSSL Project                                 http://www.openssl.org
Development Mailing List                       [hidden email]
Automated List Manager                           [hidden email]