Re: /dev/random slow?

[Dave Love <d.love@dl.ac.uk>]

Nate Campi <nate@campin.net> writes:

> > Better, see recent versions of libssl0.9.6, which have appropriate
> > multilibs.  Also see previous discussion about v8 not being picked up
> > if you use sparc32.
> 
> Is this in unstable/testing?

The relevant log entries are:

  openssl (0.9.6g-7) unstable; urgency=low
  
    * enable i686 optimisation and depend on fixed glibc (closes: #163500)
    * remove transition package ssleay
    * include optimisation vor sparcv8 (closes: #139996)
    * improve optimisation vor sparcv9
  
   -- Christoph Martin <christoph.martin@uni-mainz.de>  Sun,  6 Oct 2002 14:07:12 +0200
  
  openssl (0.9.6g-4) unstable; urgency=low
  
    * fix optimization for alpha and sparc
    * add optimization for i486
  
   -- Christoph Martin <christoph.martin@uni-mainz.de>  Fri, 20 Sep 2002 22:36:19 +0200
  
0.9.6g-6 is in testing.  The unstable package probably only needs libc
from testing to install on an otherwise stable system, but I'm not
sure exactly what was required when I did it.