On Mon, Aug 13, 2018 at 10:14:21AM +0200, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 13, 2018 at 12:14:16AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 13, 2018 at 09:06:27AM +0200, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> > > > Yes, because it's patched source and also there is no openssl in the
> > > > archive
> > > > that'
On Mon, Aug 13, 2018 at 12:14:16AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 13, 2018 at 09:06:27AM +0200, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> > > Yes, because it's patched source and also there is no openssl in the
> > > archive
> > > that's built for a standalone target, which edk2 must be. See
> > > CryptoP
On Mon, Aug 13, 2018 at 09:06:27AM +0200, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> > Yes, because it's patched source and also there is no openssl in the archive
> > that's built for a standalone target, which edk2 must be. See
> > CryptoPkg/Library/OpensslLib/EDKII_openssl-1.0.2h.patch for the current
> > patch agai
> Yes, because it's patched source and also there is no openssl in the archive
> that's built for a standalone target, which edk2 must be. See
> CryptoPkg/Library/OpensslLib/EDKII_openssl-1.0.2h.patch for the current
> patch against upstream openssl source.
You're actually shipping openssl 1.1.0
Package: edk2
Hi,
Is there a reason edk2 embeds an openssl version and doesn't use
the system provided openssl?
Kurt
5 matches
Mail list logo
