Is there any reason *not* to move SqueakSSL-Core-ul.30 from inbox to trunk? I know that we are finalizing a release, and also that there has been some follow up discussion about parsing certificates in the image, but SqueakSSL-Core-ul.30 seems like a harmless and beneficial update. So unless there are objections, I would vote to move it to trunk now.
Dave
On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 11:55:42PM +0200, Levente Uzonyi wrote:
Hi All,
I've implemented support for reading the domain names from the certificate's SAN extension[1] in SqueakSSL. The image side code is in the Inbox[2]. It is backwards compatible -- everything works as before without the VM changes. I've also uploaded the modified files[3][4] for the unix platform, and a diff[5] (which somehow doesn't include the changes of the .h file).
The VM support code for other platforms are to be done.
These changes fix the failing SqueakSSL test in the Trunk, so I suggest including the .mcz file in the 4.6 release.
Levente
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SubjectAltName [2] http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/2015-May/184581.html [3] http://leves.web.elte.hu/squeak/SqueakSSL/SqueakSSL.h [4] http://leves.web.elte.hu/squeak/SqueakSSL/sqUnixOpenSSL.c [5] http://leves.web.elte.hu/squeak/SqueakSSL/diff.txt