On Thu, Jun 04, 2020 at 10:31:09AM +0200, Norbert Hartl wrote:
Am 04.06.2020 um 02:44 schrieb Pierce Ng <pierce@samadhiweb.com>: On Tue, Jun 02, 2020 at 11:17:30AM +0200, Norbert Hartl wrote:
PierceNg has an implementation that implements a subset of openssl. This implementation is modeled after the library so lots of class methods. I'd prefer to have something more object model like.
A very small subset currently, as my original need was to create an X509 request in code. PRs welcome.
If it is a small subset it might be feasible to talk about the approach taken.
Sure. I don't see too many misplaced class methods myself. I've just loaded the package into a fresh image for a spin. My self-built VM uses OpenSSL 1.1.1 (instead of OpenSSL 1.0.x in the prebuilt VMs) and there are C API changes between those two OpenSSL versions that break many tests, basic things like XXX_create becoming XXX_new, XXX_init becoming XXX_reset etc. So I've created branches openssl_1_1 and openssl_1_0 that will match the versions used by Pharo. Pierce