Give it up, the developers aren't interested. I posted a core
dump under Solaris and nobody cared enough to look at it.
Somebody is not reading e-mail. The question was answered with '[see]
./PROBLEMS, "triggered gcc bugs" [section].'
I am pretty sure they know what the hell is going on.
Anything special/subtle/uncommon we know is usually documented in
./PROBLEMS or ./FAQ depending on how often problem is encountered!
0.9.8a
obviously makes use of some go-fast supercalifragelistic
code that 0.9.7 avoids. I'm sure the developers are more
enamoured of this fancy code than of getting 0.9.8 to compile
reliably.
All "supercalifragelistic" code can be switched off with no-asm. It's
your choice, and if you're so upset about 0.9.8 being more modern, just
configure with no-asm.
There's a good chance that your problem, like mine, would be
solved by completely recompiling gcc,
*Both* problems *are* documented in ./PROBLEMS. His problem can be
resolved by upgrading binutils.
OpenSSL was the -only- source that required the
compiler to be recompiled.
Not if you configured with no-asm.
Now back to the beginning. "developers are not interested." Well, no,
I'm not interested to say "see accompanying documentation" over and over
again and you're not in position to blaim me, as I do it in my spare
time. Cheers. A.
______________________________________________________________________
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
Development Mailing List [email protected]
Automated List Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED]
