From: "Maciej W. Rozycki" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
macro> Yes, sure -- I just meant you don't get full benefits of library sharing
macro> then (but you get all the losses, e.g. slower and bigger code due to being
macro> compiled as PIC on systems that support non-PIC executables).
Then don't build with shared library support :-).
macro> Note, if you use a packaging system and the bogus symlinks get registered
macro> as belonging to a package you may get conflicts between package versions
macro> if you want to keep many of them installed. This problem gets eliminated
macro> by the patch I just sent to you.
Ah, good point... So you're saying that avoiding the symlinks
libcrypto.so.0 and libssl.so.0 kind of sends a clearer messgage,
right?
--
Richard Levitte \ Spannv�gen 38, II \ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Redakteur@Stacken \ S-168 35 BROMMA \ T: +46-8-26 52 47
\ SWEDEN \ or +46-733-72 88 11
Procurator Odiosus Ex Infernis -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Member of the OpenSSL development team: http://www.openssl.org/
Software Engineer, GemPlus: http://www.gemplus.com/
Unsolicited commercial email is subject to an archival fee of $400.
See <http://www.stacken.kth.se/~levitte/mail/> for more info.
______________________________________________________________________
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
Development Mailing List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Automated List Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED]
