[openssl-dev] 1.0.2g MacOSX x86_64 build failure (1.0.2f and 1.0.1s are fine)

Andy Polyakov appro at openssl.org
Mon Mar 7 17:38:13 UTC 2016


>>>>> The only plausible change from 1.0.2f to 1.0.2g that I see that might
>>>>> be related to this is below. Does it work if you revert this change
>>>>> (patch -R): commit 10c639a8a56c90bec9e332c7ca76ef552b3952ac [snip] 
>>>> Confirmed.  Reverting that commit fixes the build.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Does the alternate patch from RT #3885 (i.e., from
>>> https://github.com/openssl/openssl/pull/597) cause a similar build breakage?
>>>
>>
>> Confirmed, this alternate patch worked (or at least compiled) fine:
>> https://github.com/akamai/openssl/commit/c4af68c317c025c7d0c4f0495b8115d6426a25be.patch
> 
> I can also confirm that this patch does not have the problem. The test
> suite passes. Is this going to be fixed?

It was addressed in
http://git.openssl.org/gitweb/?p=openssl.git;a=commitdiff;h=6e42e3ff9cde43830555549fdafa2a8b37b9485b
(which was cherry-picked to 1.0.2). For the record, why other
suggestions were effectively dismissed. For example there was suggestion
to 'use bigint'. It was not considered as preferable, because as general
rule I try to make *minimal* assumption about availability of add-on
packages. In other words if there is a way to solve it without add-on
package, it would be preferred. myoct was ok, but I've chosen to kind of
emphasize commentary section that precedes those lines, i.e. that that
conversion is really just a prequel to next expression that gets rid of
multiplications (and divisions). I mean that oct thing was there
exclusively in order to simplify that next expression. So I figured why
convert at all, if there are no multiplications (or divisions).



More information about the openssl-dev mailing list