applications to use EVP. Add missing calls to HMAC_cleanup() and
don't assume HMAC_CTX can be copied using memcpy().
Note: this is almost identical to the patch submitted to openssl-dev
by Verdon Walker <VWalker@novell.com> except some redundant
EVP_add_digest_()/EVP_cleanup() calls were removed and some changes
made to avoid compiler warnings.
sure they are available in opensslconf.h, by giving them names starting
with "OPENSSL_" to avoid conflicts with other packages and by making
sure e_os2.h will cover all platform-specific cases together with
opensslconf.h.
I've checked fairly well that nothing breaks with this (apart from
external software that will adapt if they have used something like
NO_KRB5), but I can't guarantee it completely, so a review of this
change would be a good thing.
"Jan Mikkelsen" <janm@transactionsite.com> correctly states that the
OpenSSL header files have #include's and extern "C"'s in an incorrect
order. Thusly fixed.
This was meant for building individual ciphers separately;
but nothing of this is maintained, it does not work
because we rely on central configuration by the Configure
utility with <openssl/opensslconf.h> etc., so the files
are only wasting space and time.
script, translates function codes better and doesn't need the K&R function
prototypes to work (NB. the K&R prototypes can't be wiped just yet: they are
still needed by the DEF generator...). I also ran the script with the -rewrite
option to update all the header and source files.
consistent in the source tree and replaced `/bin/rm' by `rm'. Additonally
cleaned up the `make links' target: Remove unnecessary semicolons, subsequent
redundant removes, inline point.sh into mklink.sh to speed processing and no
longer clutter the display with confusing stuff. Instead only the actually
done links are displayed.
1. The already released version was 0.9.1c and not 0.9.1b
2. The next release should be 0.9.2 and not 0.9.1d, because
first the changes are already too large, second we should avoid any more
0.9.1x confusions and third, the Apache version semantics of
VERSION.REVISION.PATCHLEVEL for the version string is reasonable (and here
.2 is already just a patchlevel and not major change).
tVS: ----------------------------------------------------------------------
