On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 3:31 PM, Michael Wojcik <michael.woj...@microfocus.com> wrote: >> From: openssl-users [mailto:openssl-users-boun...@openssl.org] On Behalf >> Of Kim Gräsman >> Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2016 07:04 >> >> On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 2:21 PM, Michael Wojcik >> <michael.woj...@microfocus.com> wrote: >> > >> > So, in short: You do in fact have to publish and maintain one architecture- >> specific header. >> >> Thanks, I was afraid so. We're compiling for 6 different targets, so >> this will turn into an exciting problem :-) > > I don't know what your build system looks like, but it wasn't a terribly > difficult problem for us. Don't you already have platform-specific headers? > You have platform-specific libraries...
No platform-specific headers in third-parties, no. > I deal with 11 platforms for OpenSSL currently - most of which have multiple > flavors (bitness and threadedness; fortunately at the moment we're not doing > both debug and release builds as well). Not that big a deal to build all of > them and harvest opensslconf.h alongside the shared objects / DLLs. That makes sense to me -- we already build the library paths based on all the relevant properties, so if I publish opensslconf.h together with the libraries, I should be able to add the same suffix to the include path. Thanks for talking me through it! - Kim -- openssl-users mailing list To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-users
