From salvatore_uni at tiscali.it Sun Aug 1 17:54:48 2004 From: salvatore_uni at tiscali.it (salvatore) Date: Mon Aug 2 16:18:09 2004 Subject: gcry_control Message-ID: <200408011754.48881.salvatore_uni@tiscali.it> Hi, Can someone tell me what the following function does... gcry_control (GCRYCTL_DISABLE_SECMEM, 0); I know if i don't include it i get an error... but i don't understand what it actually does!! Regards Salvo From marcus.brinkmann at ruhr-uni-bochum.de Mon Aug 2 12:06:58 2004 From: marcus.brinkmann at ruhr-uni-bochum.de (Marcus Brinkmann) Date: Mon Aug 2 16:18:17 2004 Subject: libgcrypt/tests/Makefile.am patch In-Reply-To: References: <86r7qv2ib3.wl@duesseldorf.ccc.de> Message-ID: <87isc1svjx.wl@ulysses.g10code.de> At Thu, 29 Jul 2004 11:49:42 -0500 (CDT), Bob Friesenhahn wrote: > > You are right there is indeed another problem. There is an incorrect > assuption that libgcrypt_la_DEPENDENCIES has something to do with > libtool and library dependencies when in fact it does not. > > Perhaps libgcrypt_la_LDADD should be used instead? But we are using _LIBADD. Marcus From mo at g10code.com Mon Aug 2 23:41:54 2004 From: mo at g10code.com (Moritz Schulte) Date: Mon Aug 2 23:38:58 2004 Subject: gcry_control In-Reply-To: <200408011754.48881.salvatore_uni@tiscali.it> References: <200408011754.48881.salvatore_uni@tiscali.it> Message-ID: <864qnltdy5.wl@duesseldorf.ccc.de> At Sun, 1 Aug 2004 17:54:48 +0200, salvatore wrote: > Can someone tell me what the following function does... > > gcry_control (GCRYCTL_DISABLE_SECMEM, 0); It disables the use of "secure memory", which is memory, that cannot be swapped out, since it is locked into core. This feature requires super-user privileges. moritz From salvatore_uni at tiscali.it Tue Aug 3 01:35:44 2004 From: salvatore_uni at tiscali.it (salvatore) Date: Tue Aug 3 01:24:14 2004 Subject: gcry_control In-Reply-To: <864qnltdy5.wl@duesseldorf.ccc.de> References: <200408011754.48881.salvatore_uni@tiscali.it> <864qnltdy5.wl@duesseldorf.ccc.de> Message-ID: <200408030135.44613.salvatore_uni@tiscali.it> Thanks guys!!! From jas at extundo.com Tue Aug 10 18:22:33 2004 From: jas at extundo.com (Simon Josefsson) Date: Tue Aug 10 18:24:11 2004 Subject: gcrypt.h need to include sys/time.h for timeval Message-ID: Hello. This patch is to avoid warnings like the following: /tmp/jas4711/include/gcrypt.h:174: warning: `struct timeval' declared inside parameter list /tmp/jas4711/include/gcrypt.h:174: warning: its scope is only this definition or declaration, which is probably not what you want. which can be quite annoying if repeated many times. POSIX require sys/time.h (or sys/select.h) to define timeval, so the patch should be sufficient: http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/basedefs/sys/time.h.html Thanks, Simon Index: gcrypt.h =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/gnupg/libgcrypt/src/gcrypt.h,v retrieving revision 1.125 diff -u -p -u -w -r1.125 gcrypt.h --- gcrypt.h 15 Apr 2004 09:00:22 -0000 1.125 +++ gcrypt.h 10 Aug 2004 16:16:29 -0000 @@ -29,6 +29,7 @@ #include #include +#include /* This is required for error code compatibility. */ #define _GCRY_ERR_SOURCE_DEFAULT GPG_ERR_SOURCE_GCRYPT From mo at g10code.com Tue Aug 10 18:38:48 2004 From: mo at g10code.com (Moritz Schulte) Date: Tue Aug 10 18:35:50 2004 Subject: gcrypt.h need to include sys/time.h for timeval In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20040810163848.GA48323@cuttysark.lan> Thanks, I have commited the patch into CVS. moritz -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 187 bytes Desc: not available Url : /pipermail/attachments/20040810/c284fbae/attachment.bin From tonyw at prairiesys.com Mon Aug 2 17:18:15 2004 From: tonyw at prairiesys.com (Warren, Tony) Date: Mon Aug 16 10:28:07 2004 Subject: gcry_control Message-ID: Salvatore, I'm pretty sure the command simply disables the warning/error that you do not have properly configured secure memory available - it doesn't fix the problem, but it doesn't complain about it either. -- Tony Warren Prairie Systems, Inc. <}-: -----Original Message----- From: gcrypt-devel-bounces@gnupg.org [mailto:gcrypt-devel-bounces@gnupg.org] On Behalf Of salvatore Sent: Sunday, August 01, 2004 10:55 AM To: gcrypt-devel@gnupg.org Subject: gcry_control Hi, Can someone tell me what the following function does... gcry_control (GCRYCTL_DISABLE_SECMEM, 0); I know if i don't include it i get an error... but i don't understand what it actually does!! Regards Salvo _______________________________________________ Gcrypt-devel mailing list Gcrypt-devel@gnupg.org http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gcrypt-devel From wk at gnupg.org Mon Aug 16 11:07:44 2004 From: wk at gnupg.org (Werner Koch) Date: Mon Aug 16 11:08:33 2004 Subject: gcry_control In-Reply-To: (Tony Warren's message of "Mon, 2 Aug 2004 10:18:15 -0500") References: Message-ID: <87fz6nqwm7.fsf@wheatstone.g10code.de> On Mon, 2 Aug 2004 10:18:15 -0500, Warren, Tony said: > I'm pretty sure the command simply disables the warning/error that you > do not have properly configured secure memory available - it doesn't fix > the problem, but it doesn't complain about it either. Actually it let libgcrypt not anymore distinguish between secure and standard memory. Werner From nspring at cs.washington.edu Mon Aug 16 18:19:50 2004 From: nspring at cs.washington.edu (Neil Spring) Date: Mon Aug 16 18:16:37 2004 Subject: gcry_control In-Reply-To: <87fz6nqwm7.fsf@wheatstone.g10code.de> References: <87fz6nqwm7.fsf@wheatstone.g10code.de> Message-ID: <19652CA4-EFA0-11D8-8342-000A95718DA4@cs.washington.edu> On Aug 16, 2004, at 2:07 AM, Werner Koch wrote: > On Mon, 2 Aug 2004 10:18:15 -0500, Warren, Tony said: > >> I'm pretty sure the command simply disables the warning/error that you >> do not have properly configured secure memory available - it doesn't >> fix >> the problem, but it doesn't complain about it either. > > Actually it let libgcrypt not anymore distinguish between secure and > standard memory. So is it the case that I should have my code call either: gcry_control(GCRYCTL_DISABLE_SECMEM, 0); or gcry_control(GCRYCTL_INIT_SECMEM, 16384, 0); but not both? Someone asked about the "Secure memory is not locked into core" warning and I wanted to get rid of it and explain it at the same time... switching from INIT to DISABLE gets rid of the warning, but I don't know if I break things when I mess with calls to gcrypt functions. -neil From wk at gnupg.org Tue Aug 17 13:50:03 2004 From: wk at gnupg.org (Werner Koch) Date: Tue Aug 17 13:48:38 2004 Subject: gcry_control In-Reply-To: <19652CA4-EFA0-11D8-8342-000A95718DA4@cs.washington.edu> (Neil Spring's message of "Mon, 16 Aug 2004 09:19:50 -0700") References: <87fz6nqwm7.fsf@wheatstone.g10code.de> <19652CA4-EFA0-11D8-8342-000A95718DA4@cs.washington.edu> Message-ID: <871xi6oufo.fsf@wheatstone.g10code.de> On Mon, 16 Aug 2004 09:19:50 -0700, Neil Spring said: > So is it the case that I should have my code call either: > gcry_control(GCRYCTL_DISABLE_SECMEM, 0); > or > gcry_control(GCRYCTL_INIT_SECMEM, 16384, 0); > but not both? Yes. However you should call DISABLE_SECMEM as early as possible; i.e. before gcry_check_version. > Someone asked about the "Secure memory is not locked into core" > warning and I wanted to get rid of it and explain it at the same Yesterday, I figured out that there is a bug in the way the warning message is generated. This means the suggested way of doing a gcry_control (GCRYCTL_SUSPEND_SECMEM_WARN); before gcry_check_version and later enabling the messages using gcry_control (GCRYCTL_RESUME_SECMEM_WARN); does not work reliable. It will be fixed in the next version. Werner From wk at gnupg.org Wed Aug 18 13:53:32 2004 From: wk at gnupg.org (Werner Koch) Date: Wed Aug 18 13:53:37 2004 Subject: mingw/cpd problem In-Reply-To: <200406180033.i5I0XDZd077104@mailserver2.hushmail.com> (low halo's message of "Thu, 17 Jun 2004 17:33:12 -0700") References: <200406180033.i5I0XDZd077104@mailserver2.hushmail.com> Message-ID: <87hdr0k6gz.fsf@wheatstone.g10code.de> On Thu, 17 Jun 2004 17:33:12 -0700, low halo, Defender of Truth and Liberty said: > next step is to create a 'libgcrypt.dll', but the instructions on > how to do so in mingw/cpd's README file are quite vague. The best > I've been able to do results in creating an EXE file instead of a > DLL (!): Isn't there a script in the CVS to build a dll - at least partly? sorry, I don't have the time now to look into this. > P.S. The 'WkLib' package fails to compile on Debian stable (3.0r2). > Bit-rot, I guess? Very liklely. I try not to use this code anymore and haven't build it for a long time. Werner