Message from discussion
OpenSSL minimum version for saml2cpp?
Received: by 10.114.25.19 with SMTP id 19mr1011768way.22.1234739931103;
Sun, 15 Feb 2009 15:18:51 -0800 (PST)
Return-Path: <lda...@gmail.com>
Received: from mail-router01.qut.edu.au (mail-router01.qut.edu.au [131.181.254.7])
by mx.google.com with ESMTP id k32si1918220wah.1.2009.02.15.15.18.50;
Sun, 15 Feb 2009 15:18:51 -0800 (PST)
Received-SPF: neutral (google.com: 131.181.254.7 is neither permitted nor denied by domain of lda...@gmail.com) client-ip=131.181.254.7;
Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=neutral (google.com: 131.181.254.7 is neither permitted nor denied by domain of lda...@gmail.com) smtp.mail=lda...@gmail.com
Received: from [131.181.100.53] ([131.181.100.53])
by mail-router01.qut.edu.au (MOS 4.1.3-GA)
with ESMTP id CHU83174 (AUTH daleyl);
Mon, 16 Feb 2009 09:18:42 +1000
Message-Id: <09E23405-5CA9-43AC-ABBF-77F1A672B33E@gmail.com>
From: Luke Daley <lda...@gmail.com>
To: esoe-dev@googlegroups.com
In-Reply-To: <90ad28f40902151457o316b7f48t37ad77ef4cecc8cc@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v930.3)
Subject: Re: [esoe-dev] Re: OpenSSL minimum version for saml2cpp?
Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2009 09:18:42 +1000
References: <c68f7aa2-4676-48ff-929b-fac64ee26111@i24g2000prf.googlegroups.com> <139D1F17-EF44-4A05-BA7F-EA49CCAF96BB@intient.com> <90ad28f40902151457o316b7f48t37ad77ef4cecc8cc@mail.gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.930.3)
X-Junkmail-Status: score=10/50, host=mail-router01.qut.edu.au
X-Junkmail-SD-Raw: score=unknown,
refid=str=0001.0A150202.4998A2D8.008B,ss=1,fgs=0,
ip=131.181.100.53,
so=2008-09-23 00:22:14,
dmn=2007-10-19 17:58:33,
mode=single engine
X-Junkmail-IWF: false
On 16/02/2009, at 8:57 AM, Shaun Mangelsdorf wrote:
> I can clarify a little here. We developed against a 0.9.8 version
> (the specific version escapes me, but 0.9.8e sounds about right). We
> currently have a production SPEP running on Redhat 4 which uses
> 0.9.7a (not sure if this has Redhat-specific patches).. So at the
> least, it is API-compatible with that version.
>
> As Bradley mentioned, the later the better. I wouldn't be keen on
> fixing any bugs that were caused by earlier versions of OpenSSL than
> 0.9.7.
Given that there are quite a few systems that ship with 0.9.7 then
it's probably worth stating that as the minimum requirement if possible.
The current autoconf scripts don't check for dependencies at all,
leading to compile time errors if dependencies are not satisfied. I
would like to gradually make this more rigorous so it's easier to
compile this stuff from scratch. The difference being is that ./
configure will give you specific error messages telling you what's
wrong rather than make complaining about missing headers or symbols.
http://esoeproject.org/confluence/display/eu/Apache+SPEP+Installation+Guide
does not mention OpenSSL as a build dependency at all, should it?
|
