Commit Graph

4 Commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
David Benjamin
981936791e Remove some easy obj.h dependencies.
A lot of consumers of obj.h only want the NID values. Others didn't need
it at all. This also removes some OBJ_nid2sn and OBJ_nid2ln calls in EVP
error paths which isn't worth pulling a large table in for.

BUG=chromium:499653

Change-Id: Id6dff578f993012e35b740a13b8e4f9c2edc0744
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/7563
Reviewed-by: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
2016-03-31 20:50:33 +00:00
Piotr Sikora
fdb88ba2e9 Fix build with -Wwrite-strings.
Change-Id: If76154c8d255600e925a408acdc674fc7dad0359
Signed-off-by: Piotr Sikora <piotrsikora@google.com>
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/7526
Reviewed-by: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
2016-03-24 03:11:20 +00:00
David Benjamin
f4e447c16d Move ASN1_bn_print to a static function in evp/print.c.
It's not used anywhere else, in the library or consumers (Google ones or
ones I could find on Debian codesearch). This is a sufficiently
specialized function that the risk of a third-party library newly
depending on it is low. This removes the last include of asn1.h or
x509.h in crypto/evp.

(This is almost entirely cosmetic because it wasn't keeping the static linker
from doing the right thing anyway. But if we were want to separate the legacy
ASN.1 stack into its own decrepit-like target, we'll need to be pickier about
separation.)

Change-Id: I9be97c9321572e3a2ed093e1d50036b7654cff41
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/7080
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
2016-02-26 23:35:10 +00:00
David Benjamin
8c07ad3e3b Pull EVP_PKEY print hooks out of the main method table.
This allows the static linker to drop it in consumers which don't need this
stuff (i.e. all sane ones), once crypto/x509 falls off. This cuts down
on a number of dependencies from the core crypto bits on crypto/asn1 and
crypto/x509.

BUG=499653

Change-Id: I76a10a04dcc444c1ded31683df9f87725a95a4e6
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/5660
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
2016-02-26 22:40:44 +00:00