You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@httpd.apache.org by Steffen <in...@apachelounge.com> on 2017/05/01 11:37:53 UTC
Re: The drive for 2.4.26
No mod_session_crypto with apr & apr-util 1.5 and Openssl 1.1.0, error in
Apr:
Error C2079 'cipherCtx' uses undefined struct 'evp_cipher_ctx_st'
apr_crypto_openssl
C:\VC15\Win32\httpd-2.4.26\srclib\apr-util\crypto\apr_crypto_openssl.c 67
With apr & apr-util 1.6 all fine.
-----Original Message-----
From: Gregg Smith
Sent: Sunday, April 30, 2017 12:53 AM
To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Subject: Re: The drive for 2.4.26
Yes, and only with the legacy build and then only with the IDE. Those
files are static. If you build at the command line it should "just work."
When I built with apr 1.5 however apr_crypto_openssl would not build
with openssl 1.1.0. I cannot see how that has changed..
On 4/29/2017 1:42 AM, Stefan Eissing wrote:
> Is this a Windows issue? I built with 1.1.0e on MacOS and apr 1.5 and saw
> no problems.
>
>> Am 28.04.2017 um 22:26 schrieb Steffen <in...@apachelounge.com>:
>>
>> I doubt now. It was based on a note in cvtdsp.pl.
>>
>> Maybe it is only a .dsp and xml change, which I can apply to 1.5.
>>
>> Maybe Gregg can shed some light on this ?
>>
>>
>>> Op 28 apr. 2017 om 22:16 heeft William A Rowe Jr <wr...@rowe-clan.net>
>>> het volgende geschreven:
>>>
>>> Now that these are independent of one another, I think we can release
>>> before 1.6.x are released. We should just call out "New: OpenSSL 1.1.0
>>> support! (Upcoming APR 1.6.x is required for this support.)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> On Apr 28, 2017 2:56 PM, "Steffen" <in...@apachelounge.com> wrote:
>>>> When with apr & apr-until 1.6 fine even more cooler. Otherwise OpenSSL
>>>> 1.1 not supported.
>>>>
>>>> For OpenSSL 1.1 we need apr & apr-util 1.6 to build (e.g
>>>> apr_crypto_openssl for mod_session crypto)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Op 28 apr. 2017 om 14:14 heeft Jim Jagielski <ji...@jaguNET.com> het
>>>>> volgende geschreven:
>>>>>
>>>>> It would be cool to have 2.4.26 released by ApacheCon, or even
>>>>> by OSCON. There are, last I checked, 2 showstoppers on list for
>>>>> 2.4.26... Anyway we could address them and shoot for a T&R maybe
>>>>> next Weds?
>>>>
>
Re: The drive for 2.4.26
Posted by William A Rowe Jr <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.
Very sorry Steffen, I really appreciate your effort, and enthusiasm, I read
this as a direct reply to one of my notes. Blaiming my email app threading
for the confusion, thanks for reconfirming to Gregg.
OSSL can't work against 1.5 APR nor 2.4.25 but I hope we have it all sorted
for the next releases all around.
Cheers,
Bill
On May 2, 2017 3:02 AM, "Steffen" <in...@apachelounge.com> wrote:
Gregg was wondering in one of his latest posts if this issues are still
there after his commits , so I checked it and reported back here.
Sorry for my posts dear Bill, looks you do not like them. You suggest that
I stop reporting here. Next time I wait when RC tarballs are available. I
respect you as a seasoned dev.
> Op 2 mei 2017 om 08:24 heeft William A Rowe Jr <wr...@rowe-clan.net> het
volgende geschreven:
>
>> On Tue, May 2, 2017 at 1:17 AM, Steffen <in...@apachelounge.com> wrote:
>> Resume: With next 2.4 we have two not working with 1.1. namely abs.exe
with apr 1.6 and mod_session_crypto with 1.5.
>
> Nothing w.r.t. OSSL 1.1.x with 1.5.x apr will work, nor would 2.5.25, so
tell us
> something we don't know.
>
> But... What is the progress on fixing the BIO / constructors with OpenSSL
1.1.0
> and abs in the current 2.5-branch? Any updates folks? The httpd pipeline
never
> used them (Steffen, you mention you add some of the logic into your
build, but
> that must be for the BIO-oriented 3p modules.) But a broken ab is a
showstopper.
Re: The drive for 2.4.26
Posted by Stefan Eissing <st...@greenbytes.de>.
> Am 02.05.2017 um 10:02 schrieb Steffen <in...@apachelounge.com>:
>
> Gregg was wondering in one of his latest posts if this issues are still there after his commits , so I checked it and reported back here.
>
> Sorry for my posts dear Bill, looks you do not like them. You suggest that I stop reporting here. Next time I wait when RC tarballs are available. I respect you as a seasoned dev.
>
>
>> Op 2 mei 2017 om 08:24 heeft William A Rowe Jr <wr...@rowe-clan.net> het volgende geschreven:
>>
>>> On Tue, May 2, 2017 at 1:17 AM, Steffen <in...@apachelounge.com> wrote:
>>> Resume: With next 2.4 we have two not working with 1.1. namely abs.exe with apr 1.6 and mod_session_crypto with 1.5.
>>
>> Nothing w.r.t. OSSL 1.1.x with 1.5.x apr will work, nor would 2.5.25, so tell us
>> something we don't know.
>>
>> But... What is the progress on fixing the BIO / constructors with OpenSSL 1.1.0
>> and abs in the current 2.5-branch? Any updates folks? The httpd pipeline never
>> used them (Steffen, you mention you add some of the logic into your build, but
>> that must be for the BIO-oriented 3p modules.) But a broken ab is a showstopper.
Please keep on testing and reporting your finds. There is a certain tone in some of Bill's posting that tends to resonate with primal part of ones brain. Others have already fallen victim to that. Don't let it get to you.
Cheers,
Stefan
Re: The drive for 2.4.26
Posted by Steffen <in...@apachelounge.com>.
Gregg was wondering in one of his latest posts if this issues are still there after his commits , so I checked it and reported back here.
Sorry for my posts dear Bill, looks you do not like them. You suggest that I stop reporting here. Next time I wait when RC tarballs are available. I respect you as a seasoned dev.
> Op 2 mei 2017 om 08:24 heeft William A Rowe Jr <wr...@rowe-clan.net> het volgende geschreven:
>
>> On Tue, May 2, 2017 at 1:17 AM, Steffen <in...@apachelounge.com> wrote:
>> Resume: With next 2.4 we have two not working with 1.1. namely abs.exe with apr 1.6 and mod_session_crypto with 1.5.
>
> Nothing w.r.t. OSSL 1.1.x with 1.5.x apr will work, nor would 2.5.25, so tell us
> something we don't know.
>
> But... What is the progress on fixing the BIO / constructors with OpenSSL 1.1.0
> and abs in the current 2.5-branch? Any updates folks? The httpd pipeline never
> used them (Steffen, you mention you add some of the logic into your build, but
> that must be for the BIO-oriented 3p modules.) But a broken ab is a showstopper.
Re: The drive for 2.4.26
Posted by Stefan Eissing <st...@greenbytes.de>.
> Am 02.05.2017 um 11:37 schrieb Stefan Eissing <st...@greenbytes.de>:
>
>>
>> Am 02.05.2017 um 11:35 schrieb Steffen <in...@apachelounge.com>:
>>
>>> Nothing w.r.t. OSSL 1.1.x with 1.5.x apr will work, nor would 2.5.25
>> ( does w.r.t means: with respect to ? )
>>
>> Again Bill, please be accurate:
>>
>> mod_ssl with OSSL 1.1 and 1.5 apr works !
>>
>> Just build and tested it:
>>
>> [Tue May 02 11:23:54.334403 2017] [ssl:info] [pid 3948:tid 652] AH01876: mod_ssl/2.4.26-dev compiled against Server: Apache/2.4.26-dev, Library: OpenSSL/1.1.0e
>> [Tue May 02 11:23:54.334403 2017] [:notice] [pid 3948:tid 652] ModSecurity: APR compiled version="1.5.2"; loaded version="1.5.2"
>> [Tue May 02 11:23:54.365670 2017] [http2:info] [pid 3948:tid 652] AH03090: mod_http2 (v1.10.3, feats=, nghttp2 1.21.1), initializing...
>> [Tue May 02 11:23:54.365670 2017] [mpm_winnt:notice] [pid 3948:tid 652] AH00354: Child: Starting 64 worker threads
>>
> I see the same under MacOS:
>
> [Tue May 02 11:36:53.463093 2017] [http2:info] [pid 1799:tid 140736644027328] AH03090: mod_http2 (v1.10.3, feats=CHPRIO+SHA256+INVHD+DWINS, nghttp2 1.21.1), initializing...
> [Tue May 02 11:36:53.463160 2017] [proxy_http2:info] [pid 1799:tid 140736644027328] AH03349: mod_proxy_http2 (v1.10.3, nghttp2 1.21.1), initializing...
> [Tue May 02 11:36:53.464313 2017] [mpm_event:notice] [pid 1799:tid 140736644027328] AH00489: Apache/2.4.26-dev (Unix) OpenSSL/1.1.0e configured -- resuming normal operations
> [Tue May 02 11:36:53.464353 2017] [core:notice] [pid 1799:tid 140736644027328] AH00094: Command line: '/opt/apache-2.4.x/bin/httpd -d /Users/sei/projects/httpd/test/mod_h2/2.4.x/gen/apache'
FTR:
11:38:21 delight:~/projects/httpd/test/mod_h2/2.4.x> /opt/apache-2.4.x/bin/apxs -q | fgrep APR
APR_VERSION=1.5.3
APR_BINDIR=/opt/apache-2.4.x/bin
APR_INCLUDEDIR=/opt/apache-2.4.x/include
APR_CONFIG=/opt/apache-2.4.x/bin/apr-1-config
> So, where do we differ?
>
>> -----Original Message----- From: William A Rowe Jr
>> Sent: Tuesday, May 2, 2017 8:24 AM
>> To: httpd
>> Subject: Re: The drive for 2.4.26
>>
>> On Tue, May 2, 2017 at 1:17 AM, Steffen <in...@apachelounge.com> wrote:
>>> Resume: With next 2.4 we have two not working with 1.1. namely abs.exe with apr 1.6 and mod_session_crypto with 1.5.
>>
>> Nothing w.r.t. OSSL 1.1.x with 1.5.x apr will work, nor would 2.5.25, so tell us
>> something we don't know.
>>
>> But... What is the progress on fixing the BIO / constructors with OpenSSL 1.1.0
>> and abs in the current 2.5-branch? Any updates folks? The httpd pipeline never
>> used them (Steffen, you mention you add some of the logic into your build, but
>> that must be for the BIO-oriented 3p modules.) But a broken ab is a showstopper.
Re: The drive for 2.4.26
Posted by Stefan Eissing <st...@greenbytes.de>.
> Am 02.05.2017 um 11:35 schrieb Steffen <in...@apachelounge.com>:
>
>> Nothing w.r.t. OSSL 1.1.x with 1.5.x apr will work, nor would 2.5.25
> ( does w.r.t means: with respect to ? )
>
> Again Bill, please be accurate:
>
> mod_ssl with OSSL 1.1 and 1.5 apr works !
>
> Just build and tested it:
>
> [Tue May 02 11:23:54.334403 2017] [ssl:info] [pid 3948:tid 652] AH01876: mod_ssl/2.4.26-dev compiled against Server: Apache/2.4.26-dev, Library: OpenSSL/1.1.0e
> [Tue May 02 11:23:54.334403 2017] [:notice] [pid 3948:tid 652] ModSecurity: APR compiled version="1.5.2"; loaded version="1.5.2"
> [Tue May 02 11:23:54.365670 2017] [http2:info] [pid 3948:tid 652] AH03090: mod_http2 (v1.10.3, feats=, nghttp2 1.21.1), initializing...
> [Tue May 02 11:23:54.365670 2017] [mpm_winnt:notice] [pid 3948:tid 652] AH00354: Child: Starting 64 worker threads
>
I see the same under MacOS:
[Tue May 02 11:36:53.463093 2017] [http2:info] [pid 1799:tid 140736644027328] AH03090: mod_http2 (v1.10.3, feats=CHPRIO+SHA256+INVHD+DWINS, nghttp2 1.21.1), initializing...
[Tue May 02 11:36:53.463160 2017] [proxy_http2:info] [pid 1799:tid 140736644027328] AH03349: mod_proxy_http2 (v1.10.3, nghttp2 1.21.1), initializing...
[Tue May 02 11:36:53.464313 2017] [mpm_event:notice] [pid 1799:tid 140736644027328] AH00489: Apache/2.4.26-dev (Unix) OpenSSL/1.1.0e configured -- resuming normal operations
[Tue May 02 11:36:53.464353 2017] [core:notice] [pid 1799:tid 140736644027328] AH00094: Command line: '/opt/apache-2.4.x/bin/httpd -d /Users/sei/projects/httpd/test/mod_h2/2.4.x/gen/apache'
So, where do we differ?
> -----Original Message----- From: William A Rowe Jr
> Sent: Tuesday, May 2, 2017 8:24 AM
> To: httpd
> Subject: Re: The drive for 2.4.26
>
> On Tue, May 2, 2017 at 1:17 AM, Steffen <in...@apachelounge.com> wrote:
>> Resume: With next 2.4 we have two not working with 1.1. namely abs.exe with apr 1.6 and mod_session_crypto with 1.5.
>
> Nothing w.r.t. OSSL 1.1.x with 1.5.x apr will work, nor would 2.5.25, so tell us
> something we don't know.
>
> But... What is the progress on fixing the BIO / constructors with OpenSSL 1.1.0
> and abs in the current 2.5-branch? Any updates folks? The httpd pipeline never
> used them (Steffen, you mention you add some of the logic into your build, but
> that must be for the BIO-oriented 3p modules.) But a broken ab is a showstopper.
Re: The drive for 2.4.26
Posted by William A Rowe Jr <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.
On May 2, 2017 4:35 AM, "Steffen" <in...@apachelounge.com> wrote:
Nothing w.r.t. OSSL 1.1.x with 1.5.x apr will work, nor would 2.5.25
>
( does w.r.t means: with respect to ? )
Again Bill, please be accurate:
mod_ssl with OSSL 1.1 and 1.5 apr works !
Just build and tested it:
[Tue May 02 11:23:54.334403 2017] [ssl:info] [pid 3948:tid 652] AH01876:
mod_ssl/2.4.26-dev compiled against Server: Apache/2.4.26-dev, Library:
OpenSSL/1.1.0e
[Tue May 02 11:23:54.334403 2017] [:notice] [pid 3948:tid 652] ModSecurity:
APR compiled version="1.5.2"; loaded version="1.5.2"
[Tue May 02 11:23:54.365670 2017] [http2:info] [pid 3948:tid 652] AH03090:
mod_http2 (v1.10.3, feats=, nghttp2 1.21.1), initializing...
[Tue May 02 11:23:54.365670 2017] [mpm_winnt:notice] [pid 3948:tid 652]
AH00354: Child: Starting 64 worker threads
Ahhh... This is without apr-util crypto?!? That aught to work.
The only worry might be a 1.5 generation apr-util compiled against OpenSSL
1.1, which I would be dubious of.
If apr is not speaking to OSSL then mod_ssl would have no problems.
Re: The drive for 2.4.26
Posted by Steffen <in...@apachelounge.com>.
>Nothing w.r.t. OSSL 1.1.x with 1.5.x apr will work, nor would 2.5.25
( does w.r.t means: with respect to ? )
Again Bill, please be accurate:
mod_ssl with OSSL 1.1 and 1.5 apr works !
Just build and tested it:
[Tue May 02 11:23:54.334403 2017] [ssl:info] [pid 3948:tid 652] AH01876:
mod_ssl/2.4.26-dev compiled against Server: Apache/2.4.26-dev, Library:
OpenSSL/1.1.0e
[Tue May 02 11:23:54.334403 2017] [:notice] [pid 3948:tid 652] ModSecurity:
APR compiled version="1.5.2"; loaded version="1.5.2"
[Tue May 02 11:23:54.365670 2017] [http2:info] [pid 3948:tid 652] AH03090:
mod_http2 (v1.10.3, feats=, nghttp2 1.21.1), initializing...
[Tue May 02 11:23:54.365670 2017] [mpm_winnt:notice] [pid 3948:tid 652]
AH00354: Child: Starting 64 worker threads
-----Original Message-----
From: William A Rowe Jr
Sent: Tuesday, May 2, 2017 8:24 AM
To: httpd
Subject: Re: The drive for 2.4.26
On Tue, May 2, 2017 at 1:17 AM, Steffen <in...@apachelounge.com> wrote:
> Resume: With next 2.4 we have two not working with 1.1. namely abs.exe
> with apr 1.6 and mod_session_crypto with 1.5.
Nothing w.r.t. OSSL 1.1.x with 1.5.x apr will work, nor would 2.5.25, so
tell us
something we don't know.
But... What is the progress on fixing the BIO / constructors with OpenSSL
1.1.0
and abs in the current 2.5-branch? Any updates folks? The httpd pipeline
never
used them (Steffen, you mention you add some of the logic into your build,
but
that must be for the BIO-oriented 3p modules.) But a broken ab is a
showstopper.
Re: The drive for 2.4.26
Posted by William A Rowe Jr <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.
On Tue, May 2, 2017 at 1:17 AM, Steffen <in...@apachelounge.com> wrote:
> Resume: With next 2.4 we have two not working with 1.1. namely abs.exe with apr 1.6 and mod_session_crypto with 1.5.
Nothing w.r.t. OSSL 1.1.x with 1.5.x apr will work, nor would 2.5.25, so tell us
something we don't know.
But... What is the progress on fixing the BIO / constructors with OpenSSL 1.1.0
and abs in the current 2.5-branch? Any updates folks? The httpd pipeline never
used them (Steffen, you mention you add some of the logic into your build, but
that must be for the BIO-oriented 3p modules.) But a broken ab is a showstopper.
Re: The drive for 2.4.26
Posted by Steffen <in...@apachelounge.com>.
Resume: With next 2.4 we have two not working with 1.1. namely abs.exe with apr 1.6 and mod_session_crypto with 1.5.
> Op 2 mei 2017 om 07:37 heeft William A Rowe Jr <wr...@rowe-clan.net> het volgende geschreven:
>
>> On Mon, May 1, 2017 at 6:37 AM, Steffen <in...@apachelounge.com> wrote:
>> No mod_session_crypto with apr & apr-util 1.5 and Openssl 1.1.0, error in
>> Apr:
>>
>> Error C2079 'cipherCtx' uses undefined struct 'evp_cipher_ctx_st'
>> apr_crypto_openssl
>> C:\VC15\Win32\httpd-2.4.26\srclib\apr-util\crypto\apr_crypto_openssl.c 67
>>
>> With apr & apr-util 1.6 all fine.
>
> Yes, this was covered in my earlier post, 2.4-branch+apr 1.5.x+OSSL 1.0.2
> is all fine.
>
> 2.4.next+OSSL 1.1.x will require apr 1.6, with an appropriate disclaimer in
> the announce.
>
> What was your question, again?
Re: The drive for 2.4.26
Posted by William A Rowe Jr <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.
On Mon, May 1, 2017 at 6:37 AM, Steffen <in...@apachelounge.com> wrote:
> No mod_session_crypto with apr & apr-util 1.5 and Openssl 1.1.0, error in
> Apr:
>
> Error C2079 'cipherCtx' uses undefined struct 'evp_cipher_ctx_st'
> apr_crypto_openssl
> C:\VC15\Win32\httpd-2.4.26\srclib\apr-util\crypto\apr_crypto_openssl.c 67
>
> With apr & apr-util 1.6 all fine.
Yes, this was covered in my earlier post, 2.4-branch+apr 1.5.x+OSSL 1.0.2
is all fine.
2.4.next+OSSL 1.1.x will require apr 1.6, with an appropriate disclaimer in
the announce.
What was your question, again?