On Mon, 30 Aug 2004, Andy Polyakov wrote:
> Are there any OpenBSD people on the list? Yesterday I was cross-testing
> assembler modules in HEAD and noticed that OpenBSD shared build is totally
> inoperational. After adjusting rules and fixing up assembler modules to be
> compiled with -fPIC, I've ran into problem with linker. Normally we link with
> -so-name=lib[crypto|ssl].so.$VERSION -Bsymbolic --whole-archive
> lib[crypto|ssl].a --no-whole-archive. None of these seem to be applicable in
> OpenBSD case. -so-name is ignored. -Bsymbolic seems to be applicable to libs
> which do not have unresolved references. --whole-archive applies till the end
> of line and therefore tries to pull in the whole libgcc.a... So I've
> introduced separate link_*.bsd rule-set in Makefile.shared which links as
> --whole-archive lib[crypto|ssl].a -nostdlib. For the moment this applies to
> OpenBSD-i386 only. Remaining questions are: a) what's the heck with .so
> versioning? what substitutes for -so-name? b) can somebody test it on other
> OpenBSD hardware platforms? A.
OpenBSD maintains its own OpenSSL tree in its CVS repository under
lib/libssl. That tree is derived from the OpenSSL distribution and once in
a while the the OpenBSD tree is synced with the OpenSSL tree.
Needless to say, the version of OpenSSL that ships with OpenBSD builds
fine on all supported architectures.
-Otto
______________________________________________________________________
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
Development Mailing List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Automated List Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED]
