FAQ/README: we are now using Git instead of CVS

This commit is contained in:
Lutz Jaenicke 2013-02-11 11:29:05 +01:00
parent 1113fc31ba
commit f88dbb8385
3 changed files with 4 additions and 4 deletions

2
FAQ
View File

@ -87,7 +87,7 @@ OpenSSL 1.0.1d was released on Feb 5th, 2013.
In addition to the current stable release, you can also access daily
snapshots of the OpenSSL development version at <URL:
ftp://ftp.openssl.org/snapshot/>, or get it by anonymous CVS access.
ftp://ftp.openssl.org/snapshot/>, or get it by anonymous Git access.
* Where is the documentation?

View File

@ -29,7 +29,7 @@
is required if you intend to utilize assembler modules. Note that NASM
is now the only supported assembler.
If you are compiling from a tarball or a CVS snapshot then the Win32 files
If you are compiling from a tarball or a Git snapshot then the Win32 files
may well be not up to date. This may mean that some "tweaking" is required to
get it all to work. See the trouble shooting section later on for if (when?)
it goes wrong.
@ -257,7 +257,7 @@
then ms\do_XXX should not give a warning any more. However the numbers that
get assigned by this technique may not match those that eventually get
assigned in the CVS tree: so anything linked against this version of the
assigned in the Git tree: so anything linked against this version of the
library may need to be recompiled.
If you get errors about unresolved symbols there are several possible

2
README
View File

@ -190,7 +190,7 @@
reason as to why that feature isn't implemented.
Patches should be as up to date as possible, preferably relative to the
current CVS or the last snapshot. They should follow the coding style of
current Git or the last snapshot. They should follow the coding style of
OpenSSL and compile without warnings. Some of the core team developer targets
can be used for testing purposes, (debug-steve64, debug-geoff etc). OpenSSL
compiles on many varied platforms: try to ensure you only use portable