1. 14 12月, 2000 1 次提交
  2. 02 12月, 2000 1 次提交
    • G
      First step in tidying up the LHASH code. The callback prototypes (and · 385d8138
      Geoff Thorpe 提交于
      casts) used in the lhash code are about as horrible and evil as they can
      be. For starters, the callback prototypes contain empty parameter lists.
      Yuck.
      
      This first change defines clearer prototypes - including "typedef"'d
      function pointer types to use as "hash" and "compare" callbacks, as well as
      the callbacks passed to the lh_doall and lh_doall_arg iteration functions.
      Now at least more explicit (and clear) casting is required in all of the
      dependant code - and that should be included in this commit.
      
      The next step will be to hunt down and obliterate some of the function
      pointer casting being used when it's not necessary - a particularly evil
      variant exists in the implementation of lh_doall.
      385d8138
  3. 08 11月, 2000 1 次提交
  4. 02 6月, 2000 1 次提交
    • R
      There have been a number of complaints from a number of sources that names · 26a3a48d
      Richard Levitte 提交于
      like Malloc, Realloc and especially Free conflict with already existing names
      on some operating systems or other packages.  That is reason enough to change
      the names of the OpenSSL memory allocation macros to something that has a
      better chance of being unique, like prepending them with OPENSSL_.
      
      This change includes all the name changes needed throughout all C files.
      26a3a48d
  5. 18 3月, 2000 1 次提交
  6. 04 3月, 2000 1 次提交
  7. 04 2月, 2000 1 次提交
  8. 31 1月, 2000 2 次提交
  9. 27 4月, 1999 1 次提交
  10. 24 4月, 1999 1 次提交
  11. 20 4月, 1999 1 次提交
  12. 18 4月, 1999 1 次提交
  13. 22 3月, 1999 1 次提交
  14. 17 1月, 1999 1 次提交
  15. 31 12月, 1998 1 次提交
    • R
      Fix version stuff: · 9cb0969f
      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: ----------------------------------------------------------------------
      9cb0969f
  16. 23 12月, 1998 2 次提交
  17. 22 12月, 1998 1 次提交
  18. 21 12月, 1998 3 次提交