[openssl-project] platforms

Tim Hudson tjh at cryptsoft.com
Wed Jan 10 22:42:17 UTC 2018

android, bs2000, djgpp, wince, ios, uefi, mpe, vos, uclinux, vxworks - i.e.
at least 26+ platform definitions are in the category of "make test" does
not work (in general)
and that isn't talking about the other platforms where it might work or
might now which I doubt anyone has compiled on for a least a decade

The *majority* of the platforms are in unknown status - by definition -
according to our platform policy - and a significant portion of the
platforms defined do not support successful execution of "make test".


On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 8:34 AM, Salz, Rich <rsalz at akamai.com> wrote:

> UEFI is one such exception
> On 1/10/18, 5:07 PM, "Richard Levitte" <levitte at openssl.org> wrote:
>     I'd say that for the "big" platforms, we do require full build and
>     full test to say that "it works".  I would say that should be the base
>     criteria we work with.
>     But then, I can see reasons to make exceptions from these criteria.
>     As you say, on some platforms, only the libraries are built.  I can
>     also imagine a situation where we cross compile everything, and perl
>     isn't available on the target architecture, which makes our tests
>     impossible.  These should be noted for sure if we decide to support
>     them, but *as exceptions* to the base criteria.
>     In message <CAHEJ-S74_mCgmHzUYsmkuv=rrSW-9=gX0nLreARdES_bSeNcow at mail.
> gmail.com> on Wed, 10 Jan 2018 17:21:34 +1000, Tim Hudson <
> tjh at cryptsoft.com> said:
>     tjh> Follow on from the discussion in PR#5035, I think we need to add
> a "status" definition to the
>     tjh> platform which should cover the different contexts:
>     tjh>
>     tjh> 1) libraries compile
>     tjh> 2) apps compile
>     tjh> 3) make test passes
>     tjh>
>     tjh> We have platforms where we don't compile the apps and we have
> platforms where there are
>     tjh> issues in the tests - i.e. the library (with or without the apps)
> compiles and operates correctly but
>     tjh> there is a defect in the tests.
>     tjh> Defects in tests or defects in the apps are different to defects
> in the libraries.
>     tjh> The apps not being ported also does not mean the platform is
> unusable.
>     tjh>
>     tjh> That level of differences should be recorded. Perhaps a status
> for each?
>     tjh>
>     tjh> - libcrypto
>     tjh> - libssl
>     tjh> - apps
>     tjh> - tests
>     tjh>
>     tjh> For many platforms, the apps and the tests simply don't work or
> are not used; and our test
>     tjh> automation platform also does not operate for many platforms.
>     tjh>
>     tjh> Tim.
>     tjh>
>     tjh> On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 11:48 AM, Benjamin Kaduk <kaduk at mit.edu>
> wrote:
>     tjh>
>     tjh>  On Tue, Jan 09, 2018 at 01:12:56PM +0100, Richard Levitte wrote:
>     tjh>  > Speaking of platforms, I think we need to discuss what we
> actually
>     tjh>  > include in the secondary category. The platform policy
> currently
>     tjh>  > mentions these:
>     tjh>  >
>     tjh>  > FreeBSD, Windows (Visual Studio, MinGW), MacOS X and VMS
>     tjh>  >
>     tjh>  > For Windows and VMS, I know for sure that it follows our
> definition of
>     tjh>  > the secondary category (*), but for FreeBSD and MacOS X, I
> think we
>     tjh>  > may have lost the people who actively supported them (for
> FreeBSD,
>     tjh>  > that was Ben Laurie as far as I recall).
>     tjh>  >
>     tjh>  > So I think we need a raise of hands, here and now:
>     tjh>  >
>     tjh>  > 1. Is there anyone currently present on this list that want to
> take
>     tjh>  > on FreeBSD or MacOS X?
>     tjh>
>     tjh>  I guess maybe this is overcome by events since I commented on
> github
>     tjh>  already, but I can take FreeBSD (amd64). I can spin up i386
> FreeBSD
>     tjh>  in the lead up to new releases but don't normally use it on a
>     tjh>  regular basis.
>     tjh>
>     tjh>  -Ben
>     tjh>  _______________________________________________
>     tjh>  openssl-project mailing list
>     tjh>  openssl-project at openssl.org
>     tjh>  https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-project
>     tjh>
>     _______________________________________________
>     openssl-project mailing list
>     openssl-project at openssl.org
>     https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-project
> _______________________________________________
> openssl-project mailing list
> openssl-project at openssl.org
> https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-project
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mta.openssl.org/pipermail/openssl-project/attachments/20180111/b6d2f776/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the openssl-project mailing list