Hello Nathan, On 08.03.2016 22:49, ngutzmann wrote: > The variable in question should have been called ecc->p. The patch has been > updated > so that the compilation of the nettle recipe would complete successfully. > > Signed-off-by: ngutzmann <nathangutzm...@gmail.com> > --- > meta/recipes-support/nettle/nettle-2.7.1/CVE-2015-8803_8805.patch | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git > a/meta/recipes-support/nettle/nettle-2.7.1/CVE-2015-8803_8805.patch > b/meta/recipes-support/nettle/nettle-2.7.1/CVE-2015-8803_8805.patch > index 1c4b9a9..a956f42 100644 > --- a/meta/recipes-support/nettle/nettle-2.7.1/CVE-2015-8803_8805.patch > +++ b/meta/recipes-support/nettle/nettle-2.7.1/CVE-2015-8803_8805.patch > @@ -40,7 +40,7 @@ Index: nettle-2.7.1/ecc-256.c > u1 -= cy; > - u1 += cnd_add_n (t, rp + n - 4, ecc->p, 3); > + > -+ cy = cnd_add_n (t, rp + n - 4, p->m, 2); > ++ cy = cnd_add_n (t, rp + n - 4, ecc->p, 2); > + u0 += cy; > + u1 += (u0 < cy); > u1 -= (-t) & 0xffffffff; >
looks good to me. However, I needed to lookup the commit where the backport originated from, because the reason for exchanging m and p isn't obvious at all without knowing the original commit. Maybe you could include it in your commit message. https://git.lysator.liu.se/nettle/nettle/commit/c71d2c9d20eeebb985e3872e4550137209e3ce4d Regards, Andreas -- _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
