From: "Maciej W. Rozycki" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
macro> Ah sure, OK. What about the C optimization flags patch, I've
macro> sent beside the two you've already commented?
I'm not sure I'm happy with the implementation of that one, it just
increases an already complicated configuration script and leaves open
issues. One of the issues I have with it is the lack of generality,
since the user might want to give more C flags than just optimizing
ones.
Don't get me wrong here, the thought is appreciated and I can see the
reasons for doing that.
A possible thought that I have right now is that we might separate the
flags in the configuration file into those that are absolutely
necessary for successful compilation and function and those that can
be dynamically changed by the user. The result would become two
variables in Makefile, something like this:
COPTS={all the user flags here}
CFLAGS={all the mandatory flags} $COPTS
And the user could very simply override with flags of their own like
this:
make COPTS=-myflags
Does that sound like a good idea (I want to hear from more people than
Maciej on this particular item, please!)?
Note also that extensive changes of this sort will NOT end up in the
0.9.6x series. If implemented, it will be in 0.9.7 and on.
--
Richard Levitte \ Spannvägen 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]
