Hi,
On 20-01-17 23:01, David Sommerseth wrote:
> This actually tries to revert commit ec4dff3bbdcc9fedf7844 ... which is
> quite surprising.
>
> [...snip...]
>
> And this too is also a revert of the same commit as above.
>
> Had it been just a simple rebase, I'd be willing to tackle that
> on-t
Our internal options digest uses MD5 hashes to store the state, instead of
storing the full options string. There's nothing wrong with that, but it
would still be better to use SHA256 because:
* That makes it easier to make OpenVPN "FIPS-compliant" (forbids MD5)
* We don't have to explain anymor
Hi,
One more real comment and two nitpicks:
On 15-01-17 15:43, Antonio Quartulli wrote:
> @@ -3233,39 +3258,63 @@ options_postprocess_filechecks(struct options
> *options)
>
> [...]
>
> +errs |= check_file_access_inline(options->cert_file_inline, CHKACC_FILE,
> +
Hi,
On 20 January 2017 at 22:04, David Sommerseth wrote:
> We already track a lot of files over the whole directory structure
> in the main .gitignore file. But a few additional ones had been
> added into some of the subdirectories.
>
> This unifies all these files into a master file for the who
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
ACK.
Your patch has been applied to the following branches
commit 5b48e8c9f85442936f744c3c550d9d41fe8c7b60 (master)
commit 5cf585ce605d2328d7a2bb5cf44e82b8b196b551 (release/2.4)
Author: Steffan Karger
Date: Sun Jan 22 17:04:41 2017 +0100
Us
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Your patch has been applied to the following branches
commit d14b3c60c7796736e07bc3cddb0ab3a58475793e (master)
commit 61da0031b2a0036680d9e0f822619ecc116f1178 (release/2.3)
commit 2a7c994ca5b1583bc0f78c46be5b3a827f970b9a (release/2.4)
Author: David
On 23/01/17 01:23, David Sommerseth wrote:
> Your patch has been applied to the following branches
>
> commit d14b3c60c7796736e07bc3cddb0ab3a58475793e (master)
> commit 61da0031b2a0036680d9e0f822619ecc116f1178 (release/2.3)
> commit 2a7c994ca5b1583bc0f78c46be5b3a827f970b9a (release/2.4)
> Autho
On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 05:31:56PM +0100, Steffan Karger wrote:
> Hi,
>
> One more real comment and two nitpicks:
>
> On 15-01-17 15:43, Antonio Quartulli wrote:
> > @@ -3233,39 +3258,63 @@ options_postprocess_filechecks(struct options
> > *options)
> >
> > [...]
> >
> > +errs |= check_file_
Carrying around the INLINE_TAG is not really efficient,
because it requires a strcmp() to be performed every
time we want to understand if the data is stored inline
or not.
Convert all the *_inline attributes to bool to make the
logic easier and checks more efficient.
Signed-off-by: Antonio Quart
