Bug 1160625

Summary:	mod_ssl should have BuildRequires: openssl-devel >= 1:1.0.1e-37
Product:	Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7	Reporter:	Martin Frodl <mfrodl>
Component:	httpd	Assignee:	Luboš Uhliarik <luhliari>
Status:	CLOSED ERRATA	QA Contact:	Martin Frodl <mfrodl>
Severity:	unspecified	Docs Contact:
Priority:	unspecified
Version:	7.0	CC:	isenfeld, jkaluza, jorton, optak
Target Milestone:	rc
Target Release:	---
Hardware:	Unspecified
OS:	Unspecified
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:	httpd-2.4.6-32.el7	Doc Type:	Bug Fix
Doc Text:	Cause: httpd requres openssl-devel >= 1:1.0.1e-37 in order to work, but this was not strictly required in httpd spec file. Consequence: It was possible to build httpd with too old openssl, but the resulting build did not work as expected. Fix: "BuildRequires: openssl-libs >= 1:1.0.1e-37" has been added to httpd package. Result: It is no longer possible to build httpd with too old openssl.	Story Points:	---
Clone Of:		Environment:
Last Closed:	2015-11-19 04:36:11 UTC	Type:	Bug
Regression:	---	Mount Type:	---
Documentation:	---	CRM:
Verified Versions:		Category:	---
oVirt Team:	---	RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team:	---	Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:

Description Martin Frodl 2014-11-05 09:31:22 UTC

Description of problem:

In order to fix bug 1080125, the line 'Requires: openssl-libs >= 1:1.0.1e-37' was added to package's spec file, section mod_ssl. However, the fix does not work when httpd is accidentally built against an older version of openssl-devel, even if openssl-libs >= 1:1.0.1e-37 is present at run time. This is exactly what happened with bug 1080125 (see comment 14 there) and can in principle happen to any user trying to rebuild the SRPM. To prevent this, the following line in spec file:

  BuildRequires: openssl-devel

should be changed to

  BuildRequires: openssl-devel >= 1:1.0.1e-37

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
httpd-2.4.6-29.el7

Comment 8 errata-xmlrpc 2015-11-19 04:36:11 UTC

Since the problem described in this bug report should be
resolved in a recent advisory, it has been closed with a
resolution of ERRATA.

For information on the advisory, and where to find the updated
files, follow the link below.

If the solution does not work for you, open a new bug report.

https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2015-2194.html