From: Jean-Marc Desperrier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
jean-marc.desperrier> I'd be in favor of longer names, with the
jean-marc.desperrier> version number included when there are
jean-marc.desperrier> incompabilities between version number.
I think there's still support for win16. Isn't long file names a
problem there?
jean-marc.desperrier> And when the user modifies one of the options
jean-marc.desperrier> that will result in a library that is binary
jean-marc.desperrier> incompatible with other libraries of the same
jean-marc.desperrier> version number (for exemple suppressing an
jean-marc.desperrier> algorythm, that will result in a change of some
jean-marc.desperrier> of the openssl structures sizes), an even longer
jean-marc.desperrier> name that either shows the exact option used, or
jean-marc.desperrier> is based on a date value and will be unique for
jean-marc.desperrier> each compilation.
Hmm, that is a problem for sure, but I'm not sure your suggestion
would solve much, only replace one problem with another.
--
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]
