> appro> > and other details I'm not aware of. I've heard > appro> > suggestions of creating several variants of the OpenSSL libraries that > appro> > would be used in parallell with the different MSVC libraries, and > appro> > that's where a naming convention is becoming even more important. > appro> > appro> I'd say that we should rather strive for being more like USER32 or any > appro> other system component, i.e. being MT-safe and neutral to any particular > appro> compiler run-time environment. > > That would be great, so how does one do that?
Note that I didn't say it would be trivial, nor that I know exactly how to actually do it:-) I merely said that having observed how system components [e.g. KERNEL32] are linked there seem to be a way to achieve this [noble] goal. Step in the direction would be to understand exactly *why* it's not possible to interchange /MD and /MDd versions. The conclusion might be hard to accept. As it might turn out that the only way is to break dependency from MSVCRT, but the catch is that it's MSVCRT stands for stdio.h, malloc.h and string.h. malloc.h and string.h are relatively easy to replace (e.g. by linking with the static LIBC), but probably not stdio.h (linking it statically probably won't work as it most likely will interfere with another copy of stdio and one most likely will have to implement some ascetic replacement). A. ______________________________________________________________________ OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org Development Mailing List [EMAIL PROTECTED] Automated List Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED]
