From e89c82f549dcc457cbd4ba522f0b0922659cca5c Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: =?utf8?q?Lutz=20J=C3=A4nicke?= Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2002 11:12:14 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] Don't declare 2 WARNINGS sections Submitted by: Reviewed by: PR: --- doc/apps/ca.pod | 22 ++++++++++------------ 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-) diff --git a/doc/apps/ca.pod b/doc/apps/ca.pod index f50fe9c8ed..183cd475c8 100644 --- a/doc/apps/ca.pod +++ b/doc/apps/ca.pod @@ -517,18 +517,6 @@ A sample configuration file with the relevant sections for B: commonName = supplied emailAddress = optional -=head1 WARNINGS - -The B command is quirky and at times downright unfriendly. - -The B utility was originally meant as an example of how to do things -in a CA. It was not supposed to be used as a full blown CA itself: -nevertheless some people are using it for this purpose. - -The B command is effectively a single user command: no locking is -done on the various files and attempts to run more than one B command -on the same database can have unpredictable results. - =head1 FILES Note: the location of all files can change either by compile time options, @@ -593,6 +581,16 @@ create an empty file. =head1 WARNINGS +The B command is quirky and at times downright unfriendly. + +The B utility was originally meant as an example of how to do things +in a CA. It was not supposed to be used as a full blown CA itself: +nevertheless some people are using it for this purpose. + +The B command is effectively a single user command: no locking is +done on the various files and attempts to run more than one B command +on the same database can have unpredictable results. + The B option should be used with caution. If care is not taken then it can be a security risk. For example if a certificate request contains a basicConstraints extension with CA:TRUE and the -- 2.25.1