- 06 3月, 1999 2 次提交
-
-
由 Ben Laurie 提交于
-
由 Ralf S. Engelschall 提交于
consistent in the source tree and replaced `/bin/rm' by `rm'. Additonally cleaned up the `make links' target: Remove unnecessary semicolons, subsequent redundant removes, inline point.sh into mklink.sh to speed processing and no longer clutter the display with confusing stuff. Instead only the actually done links are displayed.
-
- 28 2月, 1999 1 次提交
-
-
由 Ben Laurie 提交于
-
- 23 2月, 1999 1 次提交
-
-
由 Ralf S. Engelschall 提交于
-
- 22 2月, 1999 2 次提交
-
-
由 Dr. Stephen Henson 提交于
without -debug option to mk1mf.pl. Change _export to is_export (_export is a reserved word under VC++). Add yucky function prototype function pointer casts. Sanitise the included files in crypto/x509v3. Also changed ssleay.exe target to openssl.exe
-
由 Dr. Stephen Henson 提交于
Submitted by: Ulf Moeller <ulf@fitug.de>
-
- 19 2月, 1999 1 次提交
-
-
由 Ben Laurie 提交于
-
- 18 2月, 1999 1 次提交
-
-
由 Ben Laurie 提交于
-
- 10 2月, 1999 1 次提交
-
-
由 Ralf S. Engelschall 提交于
1. merge various obsolete readme texts into doc/ssleay.txt where we collect the old documents and readme texts. 2. remove the first part of files where I'm already sure that we no longer need them because of three reasons: either they are just temporary files which were left by Eric or they are preserved original files where I've verified that the diff is also available in the CVS via "cvs diff -rSSLeay_0_8_1b" or they were renamed (as it was definitely the case for the crypto/md/ stuff). We've still a horrible mess under crypto/bn/asm/. There for a lot of files I'm sure whether we need them or not. So, when someone knows it better, feel free to cleanup there.
-
- 20 1月, 1999 2 次提交
-
-
由 Ben Laurie 提交于
-
由 Ben Laurie 提交于
-
- 19 1月, 1999 1 次提交
-
-
由 Dr. Stephen Henson 提交于
of 'make errors' without causing huge re-organisations of files when a new code is added.
-
- 08 1月, 1999 1 次提交
-
-
由 Ben Laurie 提交于
-
- 05 1月, 1999 1 次提交
-
-
由 Ben Laurie 提交于
-
- 31 12月, 1998 1 次提交
-
-
由 Ralf S. Engelschall 提交于
1. The already released version was 0.9.1c and not 0.9.1b 2. The next release should be 0.9.2 and not 0.9.1d, because first the changes are already too large, second we should avoid any more 0.9.1x confusions and third, the Apache version semantics of VERSION.REVISION.PATCHLEVEL for the version string is reasonable (and here .2 is already just a patchlevel and not major change). tVS: ----------------------------------------------------------------------
-
- 30 12月, 1998 1 次提交
-
-
由 Ben Laurie 提交于
-
- 23 12月, 1998 2 次提交
-
-
由 Ralf S. Engelschall 提交于
-
由 Ralf S. Engelschall 提交于
-
- 22 12月, 1998 1 次提交
-
-
由 Ralf S. Engelschall 提交于
-
- 21 12月, 1998 3 次提交
-
-
由 Ralf S. Engelschall 提交于
-
由 Ralf S. Engelschall 提交于
-
由 Ralf S. Engelschall 提交于
-