[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: Should we settle on one SSL implementation?

From: Jesse Keating <jkeating redhat com>
To: fedora-devel-list redhat com
Subject: Re: Should we settle on one SSL implementation?
Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2007 10:34:10 -0400

On Tue, 23 Oct 2007 16:23:24 +0200
Tomas Mraz <tmraz redhat com> wrote:

> Why remove? Just not use a built-in code but call NSS instead.

Call NSS, to make a sha1sum?

-- 
Jesse Keating
Fedora -- All my bits are free, are yours?

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Should we settle on one SSL implementation?
  - From: Bernardo Innocenti

References:
- Should we settle on one SSL implementation?
  - From: Bernardo Innocenti
- Re: Should we settle on one SSL implementation?
  - From: Thomas M Steenholdt
- Re: Should we settle on one SSL implementation?
  - From: Steve Grubb
- Re: Should we settle on one SSL implementation?
  - From: John Dennis
- Re: Should we settle on one SSL implementation?
  - From: Rex Dieter
- Re: Should we settle on one SSL implementation?
  - From: seth vidal
- Re: Should we settle on one SSL implementation?
  - From: Jesse Keating
- Re: Should we settle on one SSL implementation?
  - From: Tomas Mraz

[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]