New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Update and clean up openssl #13126
Comments
comment:1
The previous version of openssl had no Mercurial repository (!), so I created one, then made the changes relevant to this ticket. I'm attaching the diff showing those changes. This also adds an spkg-check script. OS X Lion: builds and passes tests mark, hawk: the build fails, but it did with the old version also. I don't have the time to track down the test failures right now. I'm guessing that they would have happened with the old spkg as well, but I haven't actually tried that. For OS X, I don't have access to any non-Lion machines. |
comment:2
Two immediate details: mention the Trac number in |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
comment:3
Could you make it support OS X PPC also (removing |
comment:4
Could you please post the error message of the old OpenSSL spkg on OS X Lion? |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
comment:5
Good news! Unlike the old spkg, the new one does build on Skynet |
comment:6
The openssl |
Attachment: config.patch.gz Patch to the openssl sources to fix building on Solaris |
comment:7
After putting attachment: config.patch in |
comment:8
I've now added config.patch to the spkg, applying it in all cases (not just on Solaris). Is this what you meant? For me, this still builds on OS X Lion (and passes tests), builds on sage.math (and fails tests), builds on mark, but doesn't build on hawk:
This is from a version of Sage built with |
comment:9
Okay, with a better Sage installation on hawk, this openssl spkg builds for me. It fails self-tests, but that seems to be common... |
comment:11
etc., probably ok, but the developer guide has
not that I want to hold up #11080 at all. Also, I really didn't understand the very long discussion about licensing at #11080 at all - but I assume that this will be an optional spkg, only needed if one's computer doesn't have openssl dev "headers" and wants to build from scratch and/or use the OpenID logins? |
comment:12
Replying to @kcrisman:
OpenSSL would be required both to build and run Sage. The spkg is optional only in the sense that you don't need it if the operating system provides it. Since OpenSSL is truly required for Sage, it's dubious that Sage is obeying the GPL, but IANAL. |
comment:13
Right, I just meant that under ordinary circumstances this spkg would not be required. This actually takes a while to build, I'm a little surprised... did it overwrite my existing openssl headers, by the way? Hopefully that wouldn't be a problem :( Built ok on OS X 10.6 Intel and OS X 10.4 PPC. I did not run self-tests, pursuant to John's comment above and since it's an optional spkg. So I guess it's ok that What is the status here? John tested the Solaris patch from Jeroen. If Jeroen tested on Lion, then this should be mostly okay, possibly except my comment about |
Reviewer: Jeroen Demeyer, John Palmieri, Karl-Dieter Crisman |
Changed author from John Palmieri to John Palmieri, Jeroen Demeyer |
comment:14
I modified the patch to make the If it builds on OS X 10.6 Intel and OS X 10.4 PPC, that's good news, since the patches were affecting those builds and I don't have access to those platforms to test. |
comment:15
Like I said, not crucial, but if it wasn't too much effort.
Full disclosure; the PPC one still was using the Apple gcc, because I hadn't had access to it for a while (no keyboard) and it's still building the latest beta. So maybe that's a false alarm, though I have no reason to suspect not - I can try again whenever that finishes if it's really important. But the 10.6 was with Sage 5.1.beta3, so that should have the Sage-provided gcc in use. So no worries about the other |
comment:16
For what it's worth, I've tested on two Lion machines, and it has not only built, but passed self-tests. |
comment:17
Interesting, for me it fails on OS X 10.4 PPC:
|
comment:18
I think that my build on my machine is far enough along that I can check this now.
Hmm. I'm not sure where that comes from, after the patch - were there other instances in the configuration? |
Attachment: trac_13126-openssl.patch.gz patch for openssl spkg; for review only |
comment:19
Please try this version, in which I've removed a few more instances of |
comment:20
This may have to wait a bit for me (my computer is still finishing the previous one, and I have to go home soon), but maybe Jeroen can ask moufang to take a stab at it. Otherwise I'll try in a day or two. |
comment:21
Okay, I got the same error, so this is undoubtedly the problem - remember, before you only removed the |
comment:22
Luckily, I had a 5.0.1 release candidate built on a very similar (but faster) computer at home, with the gcc spkg and so forth. Result of latest spkg posted here...
|
comment:23
Yep, the latest spkg does compile on OS X 10.4. |
comment:24
Okay, then it only remains for someone other than John to test this on Lion, I guess - the spkg still looks correct. |
Changed reviewer from Jeroen Demeyer, John Palmieri, Karl-Dieter Crisman to Jeroen Demeyer, John Palmieri, Karl-Dieter Crisman, Benjamin Jones |
comment:25
Builds on Lion (Mac OS X 10.7.4) (Darwin Kernel Version 11.4.0) (sage-5.1.beta6). Here is the build log: http://sage.math.washington.edu/home/bjones/openssl-1.0.1c.p0.log Since this is the last issue, I'll give the ticket a positive review. |
comment:27
moved spkg to the servers |
comment:29
For the search engines:
|
Changed keywords from openssl to openssl PyOpenSSL ssl.h SageNB notebook 0.9.0 |
The current openssl package doesn't build on OS X Lion and OS X PowerPC. Here is an spkg which does; it also updates openssl from 1.0.1a to 1.0.1c:
Component: packages: optional
Keywords: openssl PyOpenSSL ssl.h SageNB notebook 0.9.0
Author: John Palmieri, Jeroen Demeyer
Reviewer: Jeroen Demeyer, John Palmieri, Karl-Dieter Crisman, Benjamin Jones
Issue created by migration from https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/13126
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: