Change the FAQ entry a bit, giving the details as I observed them.

This commit is contained in:
Richard Levitte 2000-07-05 16:39:04 +00:00
parent d5870bbe23
commit 9b2961573a

18
FAQ
View File

@ -133,6 +133,13 @@ the "PRNG not seeded" error message may occur.
when trying to password-encrypt an RSA key! This is a bug in the when trying to password-encrypt an RSA key! This is a bug in the
library; try a later version instead.] library; try a later version instead.]
For Solaris 2.6, Tim Nibbe <tnibbe@sprint.net> and others have suggested
installing the SUNski package from Sun patch 105710-01 (Sparc) which
adds a /dev/random device and make sure it gets used, usually through
$RANDFILE. There are probably similar patches for the other Solaris
versions. However, be warned that /dev/random is usually a blocking
device, which may have som effects on OpenSSL.
* Why does the linker complain about undefined symbols? * Why does the linker complain about undefined symbols?
@ -330,9 +337,14 @@ be safely used.
On some Alpha installations running True64 Unix and Compaq C, the compilation On some Alpha installations running True64 Unix and Compaq C, the compilation
of crypto/sha/sha_dgst.c fails with the message 'Fatal: Insufficient virtual of crypto/sha/sha_dgst.c fails with the message 'Fatal: Insufficient virtual
memory to continue compilation.' It's currently unknown why this happens, memory to continue compilation.' As far as the tests have shown, this is a
except that it has to do with optimization. The very quick solution would compiler bug. What happens is that it eats up resident memory (not the swap)
be to compile everything with -O0 as optimization level, but that's not a very until the current limit is reached and then dies with the error message given
above. The bug in question is clearly in the optimization code, because if
one eliminates optimization completely (-O0), the compilation goes through
(and the compiler consumes about 2MB of resident memory instead of 128MB or
whatever one's limit is currently). The very quick solution would be to
compile everything with -O0 as optimization level, but that's not a very
nice thing to do for those who expect to get the best result from OpenSSL. nice thing to do for those who expect to get the best result from OpenSSL.
A bit more complicated solution is the following: A bit more complicated solution is the following: