Hi:
Well, the idea is some sort of configuration control. The developers get
the headers and the libraries and they do some sort of work. When we get a
new version and test it and all that good stuff, they get headers and
libraries and continue to work. Also makes automated builds a little
easier. Just get the files from here sort of idea. And that way they don't
have to waste time building OpenSSL that really isn't going to change for
them (much).
Anyway. I think I'll just point then to include/openssl and that's the
header files they use.
Best Regards
John Cebasek
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> ----------
> From: G�tz Babin-Ebell
> Reply To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Friday, March 22, 2002 16:29
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Best way to handle includes?
>
> John Cebasek wrote:
> >
> > Hi All;
> Hello John,
>
> > I need some comments.
> >
> > We've been creating some 'black boxes' for other developers in our
> company
> > to work with. One of the black boxes is opensll. We want to distribute
> to
> > our developers just 'enough'. So they'll be getting the libraries, but
> what
> > do I have to give them in the way of includes. Should the developers
> just
> > get the include/openssl directory or can I trim that down more.
>
> Why would you do that ?
>
> You can't hide any information about OpenSSL that way.
> If your developer want to see the full list of headers,
> they can get them from www.openssl.org.
> (besides the sources...)
>
> And figuring out which header they need costs time
> you really should spent on doing something usefull.
>
> Bye
>
> Goetz
>
> --
> Goetz Babin-Ebell, TC TrustCenter AG, http://www.trustcenter.de
> Sonninstr. 24-28, 20097 Hamburg, Germany
> Tel.: +49-(0)40 80 80 26 -0, Fax: +49-(0)40 80 80 26 -126
>
>
______________________________________________________________________
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
Development Mailing List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Automated List Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED]
