[openssl.org #4169] openssl-1.0.2e build still recommends deprecated (unnecessary?) `make depend`, returns numerous warnings abt not finding stddef.h

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

[openssl.org #4169] openssl-1.0.2e build still recommends deprecated (unnecessary?) `make depend`, returns numerous warnings abt not finding stddef.h

Rich Salz via RT
Okay, the focus on this ticket is now to update the configure script output. :)
As previously described here, you can ignore the recommendation to run make
depend.

--
Ticket here: http://rt.openssl.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=4169
Please log in as guest with password guest if prompted

--
openssl-dev mailing list
To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [openssl.org #4169] openssl-1.0.2e build still recommends deprecated (unnecessary?) `make depend`, returns numerous warnings abt not finding stddef.h

Rich Salz via RT
On 03/14/2016 11:25 AM, Rich Salz via RT wrote:
> Okay, the focus on this ticket is now to update the configure script output. :)
> As previously described here, you can ignore the recommendation to run make
> depend.

Not quite ... currently, without `make depend`

        make clean
        ./config ...
        make -j$CORES
                ...
                making all in crypto/err...
                make[2]: Entering directory
'/usr/local/src/openssl/openssl-1.0.2g/crypto/err'
                /usr/bin/gcc-5 -I.. -I../.. -I../modes -I../asn1 -I../evp
-I../../include  -fPIC -DOPENSSL_PIC -DOPENSSL_THREADS -D_REENTRANT
-DDSO_DLFCN -DHAVE_DLFCN_H -D_GNU_SOURCE -DOPENSSL_NO_BUF_FREELISTS
-DOPENSSL_NO_HEARTBEAT -DPURIFY -DSSL_FORBID_ENULL -DTERMIO
-Wa,--noexecstack -Wall -fno-common -Wa,--noexecstack -m64 -DL_ENDIAN
-O3 -Wall -DOPENSSL_IA32_SSE2 -DOPENSSL_BN_ASM_MONT
-DOPENSSL_BN_ASM_MONT5 -DOPENSSL_BN_ASM_GF2m -DSHA1_ASM -DSHA256_ASM
-DSHA512_ASM -DMD5_ASM -DAES_ASM -DVPAES_ASM -DBSAES_ASM -DWHIRLPOOL_ASM
-DGHASH_ASM -DECP_NISTZ256_ASM -O3 -Wall -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2
-fstack-protector -funwind-tables -fasynchronous-unwind-tables
-fmessage-length=0 -grecord-gcc-switches -march=x86-64 -mtune=nocona  -c
-o err.o err.c
                make[2]: *** No rule to make target '../../include/openssl/comp.h',
needed by 'err_all.o'.  Stop.
                make[2]: Leaving directory
'/usr/local/src/openssl/openssl-1.0.2g/crypto/err'
                Makefile:88: recipe for target 'subdirs' failed
                make[1]: *** [subdirs] Error 1
                make[1]: Leaving directory '/usr/local/src/openssl/openssl-1.0.2g/crypto'
                Makefile:284: recipe for target 'build_crypto' failed
                make: *** [build_crypto] Error 1


whereas

        make clean
        ./config ... (same)
        make depend
                ( ... lots of warnings, unable to find include files ... )
        make

builds OK.

So the choice is

        NO `make depend` -> fail to build.

or

        WITH buggy `make depend` -> builds,

but is it reliable?

Here, atm, I've no working path to a 'clean' (warning/error-free) build.


--
Ticket here: http://rt.openssl.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=4169
Please log in as guest with password guest if prompted

--
openssl-dev mailing list
To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [openssl.org #4169] openssl-1.0.2e build still recommends deprecated (unnecessary?) `make depend`, returns numerous warnings abt not finding stddef.h

Salz, Rich
 
> Here, atm, I've no working path to a 'clean' (warning/error-free) build.

Yes, 'make clean' is just as good as 'make depend'

--
openssl-dev mailing list
To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [openssl.org #4169] openssl-1.0.2e build still recommends deprecated (unnecessary?) `make depend`, returns numerous warnings abt not finding stddef.h

Rich Salz via RT
 
> Here, atm, I've no working path to a 'clean' (warning/error-free) build.

Yes, 'make clean' is just as good as 'make depend'


--
Ticket here: http://rt.openssl.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=4169
Please log in as guest with password guest if prompted

--
openssl-dev mailing list
To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [openssl.org #4169] openssl-1.0.2e build still recommends deprecated (unnecessary?) `make depend`, returns numerous warnings abt not finding stddef.h

Rich Salz via RT
On 03/14/2016 12:34 PM, Salz, Rich via RT wrote:
>
>> Here, atm, I've no working path to a 'clean' (warning/error-free) build.
>
> Yes, 'make clean' is just as good as 'make depend'
>

We're obviously not communicating.

'make clean', without 'make depend' does NOT build.

using 'make depend' BUILDS, but not without 1000's of lines of 'warnings'.


--
Ticket here: http://rt.openssl.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=4169
Please log in as guest with password guest if prompted

--
openssl-dev mailing list
To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [openssl.org #4169] openssl-1.0.2e build still recommends deprecated (unnecessary?) `make depend`, returns numerous warnings abt not finding stddef.h

Salz, Rich
> We're obviously not communicating.

No, sorry.

> 'make clean', without 'make depend' does NOT build.
>
> using 'make depend' BUILDS, but not without 1000's of lines of 'warnings'.

Ignore them.  'make depend' attempts to optimize dependencies so that only what's needed is built.  In this particular case it's more trouble than it's worth.

A future update to 1.0.2 might just remove that.
--
openssl-dev mailing list
To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [openssl.org #4169] openssl-1.0.2e build still recommends deprecated (unnecessary?) `make depend`, returns numerous warnings abt not finding stddef.h

Rich Salz via RT
> We're obviously not communicating.

No, sorry.

> 'make clean', without 'make depend' does NOT build.
>
> using 'make depend' BUILDS, but not without 1000's of lines of 'warnings'.

Ignore them.  'make depend' attempts to optimize dependencies so that only what's needed is built.  In this particular case it's more trouble than it's worth.

A future update to 1.0.2 might just remove that.


--
Ticket here: http://rt.openssl.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=4169
Please log in as guest with password guest if prompted

--
openssl-dev mailing list
To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [openssl.org #4169] openssl-1.0.2e build still recommends deprecated (unnecessary?) `make depend`, returns numerous warnings abt not finding stddef.h

Rich Salz via RT
On 03/14/2016 12:41 PM, Salz, Rich via RT wrote:
>> 'make clean', without 'make depend' does NOT build.
>>
>> using 'make depend' BUILDS, but not without 1000's of lines of 'warnings'.
>
> Ignore them.  'make depend' attempts to optimize dependencies so that only what's needed is built.  In this particular case it's more trouble than it's worth.


So we're back to --

In order build openssl 1.0.2g

        use `make depend` when prompted -- i.e., do NOT ignore the advice
        but DO ignore the 1000's of lines of output, and just proceed to
subsequent `make`

And that resultant build is considered a reliable build.

Is that correct?


--
Ticket here: http://rt.openssl.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=4169
Please log in as guest with password guest if prompted

--
openssl-dev mailing list
To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [openssl.org #4169] openssl-1.0.2e build still recommends deprecated (unnecessary?) `make depend`, returns numerous warnings abt not finding stddef.h

Rich Salz via RT
> In order build openssl 1.0.2g
>
> use `make depend` when prompted -- i.e., do NOT ignore the advice
> but DO ignore the 1000's of lines of output, and just proceed to
> subsequent `make`
>
> And that resultant build is considered a reliable build.
>
> Is that correct?

Yes.


--
Ticket here: http://rt.openssl.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=4169
Please log in as guest with password guest if prompted

--
openssl-dev mailing list
To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [openssl.org #4169] openssl-1.0.2e build still recommends deprecated (unnecessary?) `make depend`, returns numerous warnings abt not finding stddef.h

John Denker-2
On 03/14/2016 12:53 PM, Salz, Rich via RT wrote:

>> In order build openssl 1.0.2g
>>
>> use `make depend` when prompted -- i.e., do NOT ignore the advice
>> but DO ignore the 1000's of lines of output, and just proceed to
>> subsequent `make`
>>
>> And that resultant build is considered a reliable build.
>>
>> Is that correct?

> Yes.

How do you know it's reliable?

In particular, how do you know there is not one important
warning hiding among the thousands of others?

To assume that "any warning must be a false warning" seems
tantamount to assuming there cannot possibly be any bugs
in openssl.

When I'm writing code, for many many years I have treated all
warnings as fatal errors.  That applies to all my code, not
just mission-critical and security-critical code.

It's very trendy these days to use "formal methods" to increase
reliability and security.  Getting the code to compile without
warnings seems like 0.01% of a baby step in the right direction.
Conversely, training users to ignore warnings seems antisocial.
It is the opposite of good security practice.

> In this particular case it's more trouble than it's worth.
>
> A future update to 1.0.2 might just remove that.

If it's not supported it should be stricken from the list
of supported features.   Conversely, if it's a supported
feature it should do the right thing.  Code that generates
thousands of warnings is not doing the right thing.

--
openssl-dev mailing list
To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [openssl.org #4169] openssl-1.0.2e build still recommends deprecated (unnecessary?) `make depend`, returns numerous warnings abt not finding stddef.h

Salz, Rich
> In particular, how do you know there is not one important warning hiding
> among the thousands of others?

We're talking "make depend"
Not compiling.

--
openssl-dev mailing list
To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [openssl.org #4169] openssl-1.0.2e build still recommends deprecated (unnecessary?) `make depend`, returns numerous warnings abt not finding stddef.h

Ben Laurie-2
On 14 March 2016 at 20:31, Salz, Rich <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> In particular, how do you know there is not one important warning hiding
>> among the thousands of others?
>
> We're talking "make depend"

Is there some good reason to not fix make depend? It should also be
warning free.

> Not compiling.
>
> --
> openssl-dev mailing list
> To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-dev
--
openssl-dev mailing list
To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [openssl.org #4169] openssl-1.0.2e build still recommends deprecated (unnecessary?) `make depend`, returns numerous warnings abt not finding stddef.h

Salz, Rich
> Is there some good reason to not fix make depend? It should also be warning
> free.

No, it should be fixed.  Especially since 1.0.2 is an LTS release (for TLS, henh).  But ignoring it's errors is okay until then.
--
openssl-dev mailing list
To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [openssl.org #4169] openssl-1.0.2e build still recommends deprecated (unnecessary?) `make depend`, returns numerous warnings abt not finding stddef.h

Ben Laurie-2
In reply to this post by Ben Laurie-2
BTW, there's something very suspicious about make clean; make _not_
working, when (presumably) make clean; make depend; make does work.

On 14 March 2016 at 21:03, Ben Laurie <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 14 March 2016 at 20:31, Salz, Rich <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> In particular, how do you know there is not one important warning hiding
>>> among the thousands of others?
>>
>> We're talking "make depend"
>
> Is there some good reason to not fix make depend? It should also be
> warning free.
>
>> Not compiling.
>>
>> --
>> openssl-dev mailing list
>> To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-dev
--
openssl-dev mailing list
To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-dev