[arch-dev-public] [signoff] openssl 0.9.8k-3
Hi, we all know that patching openssl might be dangerous; so please review. I added comments and links to the bug reports. So here is just a link to the diff: http://repos.archlinux.org/viewvc.cgi/openssl/trunk/PKGBUILD?r1=36001&r2=45299 -- Pierre Schmitz, http://users.archlinux.de/~pierre
On Friday 10 July 2009 16:07:14 Pierre Schmitz wrote:
Hi,
we all know that patching openssl might be dangerous; so please review. I added comments and links to the bug reports. So here is just a link to the diff: http://repos.archlinux.org/viewvc.cgi/openssl/trunk/PKGBUILD?r1=36001&r2=45 299
openssl 0.9.8k-4, now with /etc/ssl/openssl.cnf in its backup array: http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/15495 Funny none noticed that before. -- Pierre Schmitz, http://users.archlinux.de/~pierre
On Mon, Jul 13, 2009 at 14:24, Pierre Schmitz<pierre@archlinux.de> wrote:
On Friday 10 July 2009 16:07:14 Pierre Schmitz wrote:
Hi,
we all know that patching openssl might be dangerous; so please review. I added comments and links to the bug reports. So here is just a link to the diff: http://repos.archlinux.org/viewvc.cgi/openssl/trunk/PKGBUILD?r1=36001&r2=45 299
openssl 0.9.8k-4, now with /etc/ssl/openssl.cnf in its backup array: http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/15495
Funny none noticed that before.
None of applications that use openssl is broken here, so I guess it's safe to give my signoff for x86_64 package. -- Roman Kyrylych (Роман Кирилич)
Em Segunda-feira 13 Julho 2009, às 15:15:00, Roman Kyrylych escreveu:
On Mon, Jul 13, 2009 at 14:24, Pierre Schmitz<pierre@archlinux.de> wrote:
On Friday 10 July 2009 16:07:14 Pierre Schmitz wrote:
Hi,
we all know that patching openssl might be dangerous; so please review. I added comments and links to the bug reports. So here is just a link to the diff: http://repos.archlinux.org/viewvc.cgi/openssl/trunk/PKGBUILD?r1=36001&r2 =45 299
openssl 0.9.8k-4, now with /etc/ssl/openssl.cnf in its backup array: http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/15495
Funny none noticed that before.
None of applications that use openssl is broken here, so I guess it's safe to give my signoff for x86_64 package.
+1
participants (3)
-
Douglas Soares de Andrade
-
Pierre Schmitz
-
Roman Kyrylych