On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 12:26:45PM +0200, Martin Storsjö wrote: > On Mon, 27 Feb 2012, Diego Biurrun wrote: > > >On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 12:01:51PM +0200, Martin Storsjö wrote: > >>This fixes building libavformat with OpenSSL on slightly older > >>distributions (e.g. CentOS 5.5). > >>--- > >> libavformat/tls.c | 2 ++ > >> 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) > > > >CentOS 6 is out. I've been through the pains of supporting the old > >5.5 version with nightmarishly outdated versions of everything at work, > >I really don't want to go through the pain again. Do you think this is > >worth the trouble? By the time this change has trickled down from HEAD > >to the distros, everybody will have updated and those that did not, > >should. > > I occasionally build and test a larger setup including libavformat > on such a CentOS machine, and that setup enables the openssl code - > this patch fixes building that setup. So for my case, I wouldn't > need to wait for this fix to be included in the distros themselves.
So why not change the OpenSSL check to test for the availability of that particular function? > If you're opposed, I can live without this, but this particular > patch is kinda nonintrusive, and I'd probably have written it in > this way anyway if I had ran into the issue while making the tls > stuff last year. To be honest, I disagree slightly about the non-intrusiveness. ifdefs are ifdefs and we should fight them tooth and nail. Diego _______________________________________________ libav-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.libav.org/mailman/listinfo/libav-devel
