Note: This is a public test instance of Red Hat Bugzilla. The data contained within is a snapshot of the live data so any changes you make will not be reflected in the production Bugzilla. Email is disabled so feel free to test any aspect of the site that you want. File any problems you find or give feedback at bugzilla.redhat.com.

Bug 1389202

Summary: Review Request: compat-openssl10-libp11 - engine_pkcs11 for openssl1.0.x
Product: [Fedora] Fedora Reporter: Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos <nmavrogi>
Component: Package ReviewAssignee: Nobody's working on this, feel free to take it <nobody>
Status: CLOSED NOTABUG QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa>
Severity: medium Docs Contact:
Priority: medium    
Version: rawhideCC: package-review
Target Milestone: ---   
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: All   
OS: Linux   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2017-05-29 08:05:59 UTC Type: ---
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: --- RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: --- Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:
Bug Depends On:    
Bug Blocks: 1383740    

Description Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos 2016-10-27 07:38:44 UTC
Spec URL: https://people.redhat.com/nmavrogi/fedora/compat-openssl10-libp11.spec
SRPM URL: https://people.redhat.com/nmavrogi/fedora/compat-openssl10-libp11-0.4.2-1.fc26.src.rpm
Description: compatibility engine_pkcs11 for openssl1.0.x
Fedora Account System Username: nmav

Comment 1 Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos 2016-10-27 07:41:19 UTC
This is a compat package to provide engine_pkcs11 for applications that are linked with older openssl. It does also provide a compat libp11 package, but that is intended to be used by engine_pkcs11 exclusively. For that no headers are installed.

Comment 2 Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos 2016-10-27 08:09:16 UTC
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=16221480

Comment 3 Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos 2017-05-29 08:05:59 UTC
As there was no interest in review, most likely the package was not needed.