What I'd find useful would be a branch for me to test with so that I can let you know areas where we're having to get into the guts of an openssl structure right now that will be opaque in future. IIRC last time I tried using the define to minimise the exposed api (I forget what it was called) there were some parts of the Qt code that could not be implemented. Note that I think the goal of minimising the exposed api rather than having people using the implementation details is a good thing long term, despite the fact I'm sure it'll cause me short term pain maintaining code using openssl. Cheers Rich. On 24 December 2014 at 21:55, Dr. Stephen Henson <steve at openssl.org> wrote: > On Wed, Dec 24, 2014, Ken Goldman wrote: > > > >Version 1.1.0 will (moderately) break source compatibility (for example > we will make most structures opaque etc). > > > > I as a user, I have two points of concern" > > > > 1 - Will the RSA structure be opaque? I have a continuing need to > > construct an RSA structure from binary arrays of public and private > > key parts and vice versa. > > > > Will I lose that? > > > > RSA is something which most probably will be opaque along with DSA, DH and > the associated methods. > > So you wont be able to access the structure directly. However I think it is > pretty certain there will be new utility functions to access the public and > private key components of RSA (and DSA, DH) structures. > > The reason I say that is that you need that functionality to make ENGINE > work. > > Steve. > -- > Dr Stephen N. Henson. OpenSSL project core developer. > Commercial tech support now available see: http://www.openssl.org > _______________________________________________ > openssl-users mailing list > openssl-users at openssl.org > https://mta.opensslfoundation.net/mailman/listinfo/openssl-users > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://mta.opensslfoundation.net/pipermail/openssl-users/attachments/20141224/aa4ff5a4/attachment.html>
