Ulf M�ller wrote:
>
> >>The difference is that des_cblock is defined through a typedef.
> >
> >This is correct explanation.
>
> So we have to change all the "const des_cblock" back to "des_cblock"
> in order to have correct C?
If that's true, then gcc is an incorrect C compiler.
But it might be simpler to change them to char *s, anyway, since they
are in practice.
BTW, we probably ought to fix des_cbc - at least, I assume it really is
broken (and no-one has noticed, all these years :-).
Cheers,
Ben.
--
http://www.apache-ssl.org/ben.html
"My grandfather once told me that there are two kinds of people: those
who work and those who take the credit. He told me to try to be in the
first group; there was less competition there."
- Indira Gandhi
______________________________________________________________________
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
Development Mailing List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Automated List Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED]
