Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author |
|
Reviewed-by: Richard Levitte <levitte@openssl.org>
(Merged from https://github.com/openssl/openssl/pull/11616)
|
|
Use of the low level RIPEMD160 functions has been informally discouraged for a
long time. We now formally deprecate them.
Applications should instead use the EVP APIs, e.g. EVP_Digest,
EVP_DigestInit_ex, EVP_DigestUpdate and EVP_DigestFinal_ex.
Reviewed-by: Matt Caswell <matt@openssl.org>
Reviewed-by: Tomas Mraz <tmraz@fedoraproject.org>
(Merged from https://github.com/openssl/openssl/pull/10789)
|
|
Apart from public and internal header files, there is a third type called
local header files, which are located next to source files in the source
directory. Currently, they have different suffixes like
'*_lcl.h', '*_local.h', or '*_int.h'
This commit changes the different suffixes to '*_local.h' uniformly.
Reviewed-by: Richard Levitte <levitte@openssl.org>
(Merged from https://github.com/openssl/openssl/pull/9333)
|
|
[skip ci]
Reviewed-by: Matt Caswell <matt@openssl.org>
(Merged from https://github.com/openssl/openssl/pull/7813)
|
|
Reviewed-by: Richard Levitte <levitte@openssl.org>
|
|
This was done by the following
find . -name '*.[ch]' | /tmp/pl
where /tmp/pl is the following three-line script:
print unless $. == 1 && m@/\* .*\.[ch] \*/@;
close ARGV if eof; # Close file to reset $.
And then some hand-editing of other files.
Reviewed-by: Viktor Dukhovni <viktor@openssl.org>
|
|
Especially since after the #ifdef cleanups this is not useful.
Reviewed-by: Matt Caswell <matt@openssl.org>
|
|
Reviewed-by: Tim Hudson <tjh@openssl.org>
|
|
|
|
|
|
redundant as result.
|
|
|
|
|
|
TODO: update docs, and make soe other routines
which use EVP_Digest*() check return codes.
|
|
|
|
eliminate some of the -Wcast-qual warnings (debug-ben-strict target)
|
|
now and I'm putting it back to 'make test' later today.
|
|
|
|
Submitted by:
Reviewed by:
PR:
|
|
|
|
|
|
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: ----------------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|