Hi, On Tue, 21 Jan 2020, Nirmal Khedkar wrote: > On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 3:05 AM Johannes Schindelin > <Johannes.Schindelin@xxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On Tue, 21 Jan 2020, Nirmal Khedkar wrote: > > > > > On Fri, Jan 17, 2020 at 7:05 PM Johannes Schindelin > > > <Johannes.Schindelin@xxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > > > On Fri, 17 Jan 2020, Nirmal Khedkar wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Jan 17, 2020 at 4:21 AM Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Perhaps the thread > > > > > > > > > > > > https://lore.kernel.org/git/xmqqpnfv3tq4.fsf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > > > > > > > > > > > may help? > > > > > > > > > > It did, to the extent that I now know why I'm facing these errors out > > > > > of the blue. > > > > > > > > > > I'm not quite sure as to what am I supposed to do right now, should I > > > > > wait for Liam's patch to be merged, or should I implement his fixes > > > > > locally or should I just downgrade my openssl? > > > > > > > > > > Liam's PR (#516 on GitGitGadget [1]) haven't yet passed all build > > > > > checks and I guess its still a work in progress. Nevertheless I've > > > > > tried implementing his fixes to imap-send.c, and the make still fails. > > > > > Am I missing something here? > > > > > > > > Speaking for myself, I am still waiting for > > > > https://public-inbox.org/git/xmqqpnfv3tq4.fsf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/ > > > > to be addressed adequately. I think this is the main blocker. > > > > > > > > You could be that person who addresses this, as already 10 days went past > > > > without even so much as an acknowledgement of Junio's suggestion. Maybe > > > > you can make it work, and submit a fixed patch (You could take authorship > > > > and add a footer "Original-patch-by: Liam Huang <liamhuang0205@xxxxxxxxx>" > > > > because it is most likely a total rewrite of Liam's patch). > > > > > > > > Ciao, > > > > Johannes > > > > > > The OpenSSL version on my system is 1.1.1. I've tried implementing > > > Junio's suggestions, and it just doesn't work. > > > > Does the code otherwise compile cleanly with `make DEVELOPER=1`? > > > > > It gives me the same > > > error as it gave me earlier. > > > > > > > Those are linker errors, meaning that the symbols were not found in the > > libraries. > > > > If you build with `make V=1 DEVELOPER=1` you should see that > > `git-imap-send` links in OpenSSL via -lssl (and/or -lcrypto). Is this the > > case for you? > > Doing "echo DEVELOPER=1 >config.mak" does not help in any way. I get > the same errors. Here's my diff, in case I have been making mistakes > all along. > > > --- > diff --git a/imap-send.c b/imap-send.c > index 6c54d8c29d..73ed3bc287 100644 > --- a/imap-send.c > +++ b/imap-send.c > @@ -42,6 +42,12 @@ typedef void *SSL; > #define USE_CURL_DEFAULT 0 > #endif > > +#if OPENSSL_VERSION_NUMBER < 0x10100000L > + #define OPENSSL_sk_num(x) sk_GENERAL_NAME_num(x) > + #define OPENSSL_sk_value(x,y) sk_GENERAL_NAME_value((x),(y)) > + #define OPENSSL_sk_pop_free(x,y) sk_GENERAL_NAME_pop_free((x),(y)) > +#endif That looks sensible. > + > static int verbosity; > static int use_curl = USE_CURL_DEFAULT; > > @@ -59,6 +65,8 @@ static struct option imap_send_options[] = { > #define DRV_BOX_BAD -2 > #define DRV_STORE_BAD -3 > --- > > From my limited knowledge of OpenSSL libraries, I think the error has > more to do with 'SSL_library_init()' , which appears like a > constructor to the OpenSSL library. I found these emails regarding > "if" cases around this function. Please check out these patches: > 1. Rosen Penev: > https://lore.kernel.org/git/20181227023548.396-1-rosenp@xxxxxxxxx/ I remember that one. And I agreed with Junio that the documentation suggests that the call is _optional_, while the patch suggests that it would be _incorrect_ instead. And looking at https://www.openssl.org/docs/man1.1.1/man3/SSL_library_init.html suggests to me that it is still supported. Having said that, if I look at the headers installed for `libssl-dev` version `1.1.1-1ubuntu2.1~18.04.5` in my Ubuntu installation, I see that `/usr/include/openssl/ssl.h` defines that symbol as: # define SSL_library_init() OPENSSL_init_ssl(0, NULL) but _only_: # if OPENSSL_API_COMPAT < 0x10100000L So maybe that disagrees with the documentation that says that SSL_library_init() is optional? The curious thing is that `OPENSSL_API_COMPAT` is not even defined anywhere. So maybe it _is_ the right thing to also `#define SSL_library_init() (void)` in the diff you listed above? _Maybe_ guarded within `#ifndef SSL_library_init ... #endif` guards? > 2. eroen: https://lore.kernel.org/git/20170112104219.563497-1-git-scm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx/ That sounds like a good suggestion, too. > Are the fixes made in these patches relevant here. Please let me know > if I'm going wrong. Yes, both threads are relevant, and if you can reconcile them into a patch that makes Git compile with OpenSSL v1.1.1, I will try my best to review them (Cc: me, just in case). Ciao, Johannes
