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!
The Solaris 8 issue is NOT in the FAQ.
Because it's not classified as "not encountered often enough."
Yes, it is in PROBLEMS in
0.9.8 - after you mentioned this I looked at it again and
saw the values.c thing.
But the answer there is to recompile gcc with values.c
No, values.c is small post-install(!) patch, it hardly takes a second to
execute.
This should be handled by the
configure script, that is why you have it. The
entire point of the configure script is to fixup stuff like this.
Configure
should build a small test program that checks for the Solaris linker
bug and if it seg faults then it should put in the no-asm and spit
out a message to the effect to patch the compiler or tell the GCC
people to fix their compiler. Just my opinion!!!
Then back it up with something else but words:-)
Nothing in PROBLEMS talks about compiling with no-asm as a workaround.
But ./README says "in case of problem 1. test latest snapshot, 2!
*remove asm*. 3. disengage optimization." You can't win this:-) But what
are we arguing about? That a volunteer didn't live up to your
expectations/preferences? Is it big deal?
I'm just bugged that this isn't more documented. The problem with
Solaris
How many people use Solairs? Well, it might be changing now with Sun
course change for Opteron and Open Solaris initiative, but upon 0.9.8
release Solaris x86 support was one of the least tested ones.
Not that I'm complaining but the FAQ has a entry for Alpha Tru64 and
your going to tell me that is larger deployed base than Solaris x86!!
Once again, it's all about degree of exposure. Probably by the time it
was added enough people were asking about. I wouldn't recall, as I
didn't add it...
Then move some of the stuff out of PROBLEMS and into the FAQ. Or
at least put a FAQ question in the FAQ that tells people to read the
PROBLEMS document.
If you want things change, make more formal request [as opposite to
bringing things up in passing in flamewar-ish context] and nominate new
FAQ entries [or their promotion from PROBLEMS, or their removal]. A.
______________________________________________________________________
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
Development Mailing List openssl-dev@openssl.org
Automated List Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED]
