At Tue, 21 Feb 2006 21:40:55 -0600, Reed Sheridan wrote: > > > On 2/20/06, Kon Lovett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Could be something I did, message-digest is mine, and it was recently > updated. However, it doesn't explain the above. (I will look into > this more tomorrow.) > > It turns out that the problem is that sha2-base.c now defines versions of > SHA256_Final (and other functions) that is incompatible with that in libssl. > You switched the order of arguments to most of the functions in sha2-base.c, > which is what caused this. Since libpq depends on libssl, if it's loaded > first, the sha2 egg will call the wrong version of SHA256_Final. This was > probably an error waiting to happen anyway, because the version in libssl is > probably subtly different even without a different prototype, or will be > someday. > > So what should we do? Mangle the names of everything in sha2-base.c, or make > it depend on libssl?
Hi, I'm not quite following this issue, but, please don't make it depend on libssl. I want to use it alone. Daishi _______________________________________________ Chicken-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-users
