Neohapsis is currently accepting applications for employment. For more information, please visit our website www.neohapsis.com or email email@example.com
Re: [Full-Disclosure] OpenSSL - dynamically linked binaries?
From: Honza Vlach (janusvolny.cz)
Date: Mon Mar 22 2004 - 05:14:29 CST
Sorry for choosing bad mailing list, I just thought that this issue would
be more appropriate in this list, because it concerns many other
software, than just openssl.
Secondly, this concerns more systems, one of them is LFS (Linux From
Scratch http://www.linuxfromscratch.org as of 20031212), my Slackware
Linux and several other machines. I'm trying to update it manually, and
because that `d' is just patchlevel, it should be binary compatible.
Therefore no other recompilation should be necessary. The question is,
why it doesn't behave as expected ...
I was just asking, what is the general practice, what do people here
recompile when new openssl version is issued etc.
Thanks for your time,
On Mon, Mar 22, 2004 at 10:57:53AM -0000, John.Aireyrnib.org.uk wrote:
> From: John.Aireyrnib.org.uk
> To: janusvolny.cz
> Subject: RE: [Full-Disclosure] OpenSSL - dynamically linked binaries?
> Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2004 10:57:53 -0000
> X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2657.72)
> First of all this is a question for the openssl mailing list. (see
> http://www.openssl.org/support/) Second, I'd be 99% certain that you are
> running Red Hat and have missed the instructions on building in the openssl
> FAQ http://www.openssl.org/support/faq.html#BUILD8. If I am correct, then
> it's best to use the Red Hat supplied patches. However, if you are using an
> unsupported Red Hat version (ie anything before 9), then a patch hasn't been
> released yet. There is a legacy project for supporting those versions at
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.