[PR PATCH] openssl: update to 1.1.1o

[PR PATCH] openssl: update to 1.1.1o

[dkwo]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 441 bytes --]

There is a new pull request by dkwo against master on the void-packages repository

https://github.com/dkwo/void-packages openssl
https://github.com/void-linux/void-packages/pull/37180

openssl: update to 1.1.1o
It builds fine on `x86_64 musl`, where only `test/recipes/01-test_symbol_presence.t` has two failures; they do not seem relevant, though.

A patch file from https://github.com/void-linux/void-packages/pull/37180.patch is attached

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #2: github-pr-openssl-37180.patch --]
[-- Type: text/x-diff, Size: 987 bytes --]

From a58d11079bd833b4eb1cf565dd692e1cf5cf5571 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: dkwo <nicolopiazzalunga@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 18 May 2022 09:18:08 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] openssl: update to 1.1.1o

---
 srcpkgs/openssl/template | 4 ++--
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/srcpkgs/openssl/template b/srcpkgs/openssl/template
index b77267e3d098..76a49ada7e03 100644
--- a/srcpkgs/openssl/template
+++ b/srcpkgs/openssl/template
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 # Template file for 'openssl'
 pkgname=openssl
-version=1.1.1n
+version=1.1.1o
 revision=1
 bootstrap=yes
 build_style=configure
@@ -17,7 +17,7 @@ maintainer="John <johnz@posteo.net>"
 license="OpenSSL"
 homepage="https://www.openssl.org"
 distfiles="https://www.openssl.org/source/openssl-${version}.tar.gz"
-checksum=40dceb51a4f6a5275bde0e6bf20ef4b91bfc32ed57c0552e2e8e15463372b17a
+checksum=9384a2b0570dd80358841464677115df785edb941c71211f75076d72fe6b438f
 conf_files="/etc/ssl/openssl.cnf"
 replaces="libressl>=0"
 

Re: openssl: update to 1.1.1o

[dkwo]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 250 bytes --]

New comment by dkwo on void-packages repository

https://github.com/void-linux/void-packages/pull/37180#issuecomment-1135675764

Comment:
@Johnnynator This release fixes CVE-2022-1292 so perhaps it's worth updating, despite the trivial test failure.

Re: openssl: update to 1.1.1o

[paper42]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 645 bytes --]

New comment by paper42 on void-packages repository

https://github.com/void-linux/void-packages/pull/37180#issuecomment-1135826944

Comment:
> @Johnnynator This release fixes CVE-2022-1292 so perhaps it's worth updating, despite the trivial test failure.

Is that CVE relevant for us?

https://www.openssl.org/news/secadv/20220503.txt

> The c_rehash script does not properly sanitise shell metacharacters to prevent command injection. This script is distributed by some operating systems in a manner where it is automatically executed. On such operating systems, an attacker could execute arbitrary commands with the privileges of the script. 

Re: openssl: update to 1.1.1o

[dkwo]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 447 bytes --]

New comment by dkwo on void-packages repository

https://github.com/void-linux/void-packages/pull/37180#issuecomment-1135862687

Comment:
If this does not remove it, then yes:
```
post_install() {
	if [ ! "$CHROOT_READY" ]; then
		rm -f "${DESTDIR}/usr/bin/c_rehash"
	fi
}
```
See also:
```
openssl-c_rehash_package() {
	short_desc+=" - c_rehash utility"
	depends="openssl perl"
	pkg_install() {
		vmove usr/bin/c_rehash
	}
}
```

Re: openssl: update to 1.1.1o

[dkwo]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 240 bytes --]

New comment by dkwo on void-packages repository

https://github.com/void-linux/void-packages/pull/37180#issuecomment-1157723014

Comment:
The symbol test failure seems related to our having an ancient nm (binutils), and the way it outputs.

Re: [PR PATCH] [Closed]: openssl: update to 1.1.1o

[dkwo]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 296 bytes --]

There's a closed pull request on the void-packages repository

openssl: update to 1.1.1o
https://github.com/void-linux/void-packages/pull/37180

Description:
It builds fine on `x86_64 musl`, where only `test/recipes/01-test_symbol_presence.t` has two failures; they do not seem relevant, though.