Hi! This is rxu_patch@lincomlinux.org. I'm writing this email to send a new patch to the list. The Reply-To for this email address is: robxu9 <AT> gmail <DOT> com. Mailing lists may change this depending on configured settings. The preferred method is to reply to the list. Thanks! Patches At Lincom.
Patch is included below:
Fixes some functionality with later versions of openssl (afaict)
--- kcontrol/crypto/crypto.cpp.orig 2006-10-02 06:31:49.000000000 +1300 +++ kcontrol/crypto/crypto.cpp @@ -2321,7 +2321,11 @@ bool KCryptoConfig::loadCiphers() { unsigned int i; SSL_CTX *ctx; SSL *ssl; +#if OPENSSL_VERSION_NUMBER < 0x00909000L SSL_METHOD *meth; +#else +const SSL_METHOD *meth; +#endif
SSLv2Box->clear(); SSLv3Box->clear(); @@ -2337,8 +2341,10 @@ SSL_METHOD *meth; CipherItem *item; for (i=0; ; i++) { int j, k; - SSL_CIPHER *sc; - sc = (meth->get_cipher)(i); +#if defined(OPENSSL_VERSION_NUMBER) && OPENSSL_VERSION_NUMBER >= 0x10000000L + const +#endif + SSL_CIPHER *sc = (meth->get_cipher)(i); if (!sc) break; // Leak of sc*? @@ -2365,8 +2371,10 @@ SSL_METHOD *meth;
for (i=0; ; i++) { int j, k; - SSL_CIPHER *sc; - sc = (meth->get_cipher)(i); +#if defined(OPENSSL_VERSION_NUMBER) && OPENSSL_VERSION_NUMBER >= 0x10000000L + const +#endif + SSL_CIPHER *sc = (meth->get_cipher)(i); if (!sc) break; // Leak of sc*?
On Thursday 21 July 2011 03:21:50 Patches at Lincom wrote:
<AT> gmail <DOT> com. Mailing lists may change this depending on configured settings. The preferred method is to reply to the list. Thanks! Patches At Lincom.
Patch is included below:
Fixes some functionality with later versions of openssl (afaict)
You can see even more patches here: https://build.opensuse.org/package/files?package=kdebase3&project=KDE%3A...
On Thursday 21 July 2011 03:21:50 Patches at Lincom wrote:
<AT> gmail <DOT> com. Mailing lists may change this depending on configured settings. The preferred method is to reply to the list. Thanks! Patches At Lincom.
Patch is included below:
Fixes some functionality with later versions of openssl (afaict)
You can see even more patches here: https://build.opensuse.org/package/files?package=kdebase3&project=KDE%3A...
As far as I know Robert is taking the patches that are not already part of the Trinity source repository, and mirroring them on this list so that they become lodged in our patch tracking system. Therefore, posting the source URL is not much help to use right now. :-)
Tim
On Thursday 21 July 2011 03:21:50 Patches at Lincom wrote:
<AT> gmail <DOT> com. Mailing lists may change this depending on configured settings. The preferred method is to reply to the list. Thanks! Patches At Lincom.
Patch is included below:
Fixes some functionality with later versions of openssl (afaict)
You can see even more patches here: https://build.opensuse.org/package/files?package=kdebase3&project=KDE%3A...
As far as I know Robert is taking the patches that are not already part of the Trinity source repository, and mirroring them on this list so that they become lodged in our patch tracking system. Therefore, posting the source URL is not much help to use right now. :-)
Tim
Clicked "Send" a bit early..."use" above should be "us", and I also forgot to mention that Robert is pulling patches from that source already.
Thanks for sending the link in though. If you want to help out, there are a lot of patches to go through to verify that they are not already in the Trinity sources. Every little bit helps!
Thanks,
Tim
On Thursday 21 July 2011 10:07:17 Timothy Pearson wrote:
Clicked "Send" a bit early..."use" above should be "us", and I also forgot to mention that Robert is pulling patches from that source already.
Thanks for sending the link in though. If you want to help out, there are a lot of patches to go through to verify that they are not already in the Trinity sources. Every little bit helps!
I think the easiest way to determine it is to try to build Trinity using existing specs from openSUSE. The patches which will not be rejected could be added to Trinity.
On Thursday 21 July 2011 10:07:17 Timothy Pearson wrote:
Clicked "Send" a bit early..."use" above should be "us", and I also forgot to mention that Robert is pulling patches from that source already.
Thanks for sending the link in though. If you want to help out, there are a lot of patches to go through to verify that they are not already in the Trinity sources. Every little bit helps!
I think the easiest way to determine it is to try to build Trinity using existing specs from openSUSE. The patches which will not be rejected could be added to Trinity.
So the OpenSUSE build system will continue even if a patch was already applied, but still log the errors? If so, that does sound like a good way to determine what is applied and what is not. Remember though that we can't just apply all the patches blindly to the Trinity source, as some of them are distribution specific.
Robert, would this make your life easier?
Thanks!
Tim
On Thursday 21 July 2011 22:26:36 Timothy Pearson wrote:
Clicked "Send" a bit early..."use" above should be "us", and I also forgot to mention that Robert is pulling patches from that source already.
Thanks for sending the link in though. If you want to help out, there are a lot of patches to go through to verify that they are not already in the Trinity sources. Every little bit helps!
I think the easiest way to determine it is to try to build Trinity using existing specs from openSUSE. The patches which will not be rejected could be added to Trinity.
So the OpenSUSE build system will continue even if a patch was already applied, but still log the errors?
No. But it is possible to enable all patches and then disable one by one.
If so, that does sound like a good way to determine what is applied and what is not. Remember though that we can't just apply all the patches blindly to the Trinity source, as some of them are distribution specific.
Robert, would this make your life easier?
On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 14:26, Timothy Pearson kb9vqf@pearsoncomputing.net wrote:
On Thursday 21 July 2011 10:07:17 Timothy Pearson wrote:
Clicked "Send" a bit early..."use" above should be "us", and I also forgot to mention that Robert is pulling patches from that source already.
Thanks for sending the link in though. If you want to help out, there are a lot of patches to go through to verify that they are not already in the Trinity sources. Every little bit helps!
I think the easiest way to determine it is to try to build Trinity using existing specs from openSUSE. The patches which will not be rejected could be added to Trinity.
So the OpenSUSE build system will continue even if a patch was already applied, but still log the errors? If so, that does sound like a good way to determine what is applied and what is not. Remember though that we can't just apply all the patches blindly to the Trinity source, as some of them are distribution specific.
Robert, would this make your life easier?
Might - I'd have to look.
-
Ilya Chernykh -
Patches＠Lincom -
Robert Xu -
Timothy Pearson