On 2009.08.27 19:29:46 +0200, Zahemszky G?bor wrote:
> >> I'm just puzzled why we still stick to 0.9.8e. It's almost ancient.
> >> Why not 0.9.8f? Doesn't someone need TLS extensions working?
>
> > Why don't you use security/openssl ?
>
> Why do we need a port, if we can / could use the program f
custom flags -O666 and so on:)
On Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 6:29 PM, Zahemszky Gábor wrote:
> >> I'm just puzzled why we still stick to 0.9.8e. It's almost ancient.
> >> Why not 0.9.8f? Doesn't someone need TLS extensions working?
>
> > Why don't you use security/openssl ?
>
> Why do we need a port,
>> I'm just puzzled why we still stick to 0.9.8e. It's almost ancient.
>> Why not 0.9.8f? Doesn't someone need TLS extensions working?
> Why don't you use security/openssl ?
Why do we need a port, if we can / could use the program from the base
system?
Zahy < Gabor at Zahemszky dot HU >
--
#!/
Hi,
Why don't you use security/openssl ?
-Message d'origine-
De : owner-freebsd-secur...@freebsd.org
[mailto:owner-freebsd-secur...@freebsd.org] De la part de Volodymyr Kostyrko
Envoyé : jeudi 27 août 2009 13:52
À : freebsd-security@freebsd.org
Objet : bundled openssl version
I'm just puzzled why we still stick to 0.9.8e. It's almost ancient.
Why not 0.9.8f? Doesn't someone need TLS extensions working?
--
Sphinx of black quartz judge my vow.
___
freebsd-security@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listi
