Recent

Author Topic: opensslsockets Questions  (Read 370 times)

JLWest

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 607
opensslsockets Questions
« on: November 10, 2019, 06:06:32 pm »
I have a unit that has the following use clause. when I try to compile I get the following error:

Compile Project, Target: ReverseGeoCodeDemo.exe: Exit code 1, Errors: 1
unit1.pas(8,44) Fatal: Cannot find opensslsockets used by Unit1 of the Project Inspector.

What am I missing.

FPC is 3.04
Do I need to upgrade the compiler?

uses
  SysUtils, Forms, StdCtrls, fphttpclient, opensslsockets;     
FPC 3.2.0, Lazarus IDE v2.0.4
 Windows 10 Pro 32-GB
 Intel i7 770K CPU 4.2GHz 32702MB Ram
GeForce GTX 1080 Graphics - 8 Gig
4.1 TB

Thaddy

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9273
Re: opensslsockets Questions
« Reply #1 on: November 10, 2019, 06:10:13 pm »
Yes: opensslsockets is introduced in 3.2.0. It has some dependencies so in this case I would upgrade, since 3.2.0 is stable. Here it is not a matter of just copying the newer units.
(3.2.0 is more like 4.0.0!, but anyway 3.3.1. has still more to come)
« Last Edit: November 10, 2019, 06:14:49 pm by Thaddy »
also related to equus asinus.

JLWest

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 607
Re: opensslsockets Questions
« Reply #2 on: November 10, 2019, 07:18:41 pm »
Yes: opensslsockets is introduced in 3.2.0. It has some dependencies so in this case I would upgrade, since 3.2.0 is stable. Here it is not a matter of just copying the newer units.
(3.2.0 is more like 4.0.0!, but anyway 3.3.1. has still more to come)

Sorry Thaddy but I'm confused here. this is what I found on SourceForge.
It says win64.exe  but I'm 32bit.

Is this what I should be installing?

lazarus-2.0.6-62131-fpc-3.2.0-beta-43271-win64.exe
FPC 3.2.0, Lazarus IDE v2.0.4
 Windows 10 Pro 32-GB
 Intel i7 770K CPU 4.2GHz 32702MB Ram
GeForce GTX 1080 Graphics - 8 Gig
4.1 TB

rca

  • New member
  • *
  • Posts: 7
Re: opensslsockets Questions
« Reply #3 on: November 10, 2019, 07:45:34 pm »
Quote

Sorry Thaddy but I'm confused here. this is what I found on SourceForge.
It says win64.exe  but I'm 32bit.

Is this what I should be installing?

lazarus-2.0.6-62131-fpc-3.2.0-beta-43271-win64.exe

That installer you found in the snapshot section is for 64-bit windows.

If you want to try the snapshot for 32-bit windows:
https://sourceforge.net/projects/lazarus-snapshots/files/Window%2032/lazarus-2.0.6-62131-fpc-3.2.0-beta-43271/

JLWest

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 607
Re: opensslsockets Questions
« Reply #4 on: November 10, 2019, 07:54:56 pm »
Quote

Sorry Thaddy but I'm confused here. this is what I found on SourceForge.
It says win64.exe  but I'm 32bit.

Is this what I should be installing?

lazarus-2.0.6-62131-fpc-3.2.0-beta-43271-win64.exe

Ok - Now I have "lazarus-2.0.6-62131-fpc-3.2.0-beta-43271-win32.exe"

Is this the full install 3.2.0 or can you tell from this.

Hate to be this imposing but don't want to screw up my environment.

That installer you found in the snapshot section is for 64-bit windows.

If you want to try the snapshot for 32-bit windows:
https://sourceforge.net/projects/lazarus-snapshots/files/Window%2032/lazarus-2.0.6-62131-fpc-3.2.0-beta-43271/
FPC 3.2.0, Lazarus IDE v2.0.4
 Windows 10 Pro 32-GB
 Intel i7 770K CPU 4.2GHz 32702MB Ram
GeForce GTX 1080 Graphics - 8 Gig
4.1 TB

Thaddy

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9273
Re: opensslsockets Questions
« Reply #5 on: November 10, 2019, 08:47:01 pm »
This is an aside, I already answered the question but:
For this release there should be a 32 bit windows one. For any future releases probably not pre-built, since Microsoft will drop 32 bit support. Soon. But not as soon as Apple, which already has been the case. FreePascal will have an option to build for some 32 bit Windows versions as long as there is a couple of people that want to maintain it. Ask Bart about Win95...no takers, no maintenance.
In such cases you can always use an older version. In the case of proper ssl handling, those OS's and old FPC do not even know what hacks they caused, so never use them... They will also never be upgraded.
Internet security is a serious matter, do not pretend you can write serious software without current OS's , compilers and libraries. <sigh and grumpy... >:D >:D >:D
Half the forum makes those mistakes, though (why ssl2 (and ssl3 and tls1.0)  does not work, etc
E.g. modern browsers demand TLS1.2 as a minimum with a reluctant fall-back to 1.1, but that is the borderline, Don't look at working code, look at what is demanded.
« Last Edit: November 10, 2019, 09:07:05 pm by Thaddy »
also related to equus asinus.

marcov

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7574
Re: opensslsockets Questions
« Reply #6 on: November 11, 2019, 10:17:17 am »
This is an aside, I already answered the question but:
For this release there should be a 32 bit windows one. For any future releases probably not pre-built, since Microsoft will drop 32 bit support. Soon.

32-bit Windows versions. 32-bit api support, not so quickly. Yes they will start discouraging it, but it is probably a decade or longer.

Quote
But not as soon as Apple, which already has been the case. FreePascal will have an option to build for some 32 bit Windows versions as long as there is a couple of people that want to maintain it. Ask Bart about Win95...no takers, no maintenance.

Currently there is not even an official FPC win64 release. And win95 was a special case since it was really different from winnt.

But yes, investing in 64-bit testing now and then won't hurt, if only to not have to do it hurried all at once. But there is still time

In such cases you can always use an older version. In the case of proper ssl handling, those OS's and old FPC do not even know what hacks they caused, so never use them... They will also never be upgraded.
Internet security is a serious matter, do not pretend you can write serious software without current OS's , compilers and libraries. <sigh and grumpy... >:D >:D >:D
Half the forum makes those mistakes, though (why ssl2 (and ssl3 and tls1.0)  does not work, etc
E.g. modern browsers demand TLS1.2 as a minimum with a reluctant fall-back to 1.1, but that is the borderline, Don't look at working code, look at what is demanded.
[/quote]