[openssl-users] Can you suggest any technical name for changing sources from openssl-1.0.2 to openssl-1.1.0?
jb-openssl at wisemo.com
Tue Nov 29 15:12:57 UTC 2016
On 28/11/2016 21:50, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
>> On Nov 28, 2016, at 3:40 PM, Salz, Rich <rsalz at akamai.com> wrote:
>> Perhaps I didn't understand the original question. If all you want to do is compare 1.0.2 and 1.1.0, then look at OPENSSL_VERSION_NUMBER; if defined at it's 0x10101000L or greater, then you;'re on the 1.1.x branch, otherwise you are not and therefore on 1.0.2 or earlier.
> The OPENSSL_VERSION_NUMBER macro dates back to some of the earliest
> OpenSSL releases, and is therefore always defined. Postfix has the
> following comment in src/tls/tls_misc.c which covers the relevant
> * OPENSSL_VERSION_NUMBER(3):
> * OPENSSL_VERSION_NUMBER is a numeric release version identifier:
> * MMNNFFPPS: major minor fix patch status
Shouldn't this be
MNNFFPPS: major minor fix patch status (only 1 nibble for major)
> * The status nibble has one of the values 0 for development, 1 to e for
> * betas 1 to 14, and f for release. Parsed OpenSSL version number. for
> * example
> * 0x000906000 == 0.9.6 dev 0x000906023 == 0.9.6b beta 3 0x00090605f ==
> * 0.9.6e release
> * Versions prior to 0.9.3 have identifiers < 0x0930. Versions between
> * 0.9.3 and 0.9.5 had a version identifier with this interpretation:
> * MMNNFFRBB major minor fix final beta/patch
> * for example
> * 0x000904100 == 0.9.4 release 0x000905000 == 0.9.5 dev
> * Version 0.9.5a had an interim interpretation that is like the current
> * one, except the patch level got the highest bit set, to keep continu-
> * ity. The number was therefore 0x0090581f.
Jakob Bohm, CIO, Partner, WiseMo A/S. https://www.wisemo.com
Transformervej 29, 2860 Søborg, Denmark. Direct +45 31 13 16 10
This public discussion message is non-binding and may contain errors.
WiseMo - Remote Service Management for PCs, Phones and Embedded
More information about the openssl-users