In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Thu, 20 Feb 2003 17:10:28 -0600,
Phil Howard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
phil-openssl-users> On Thu, Feb 20, 2003 at 12:23:40PM +0100, Richard Levitte - VMS
Whacker wrote:
phil-openssl-users>
phil-openssl-users> | phil-openssl-users> What I had to do to get around the problem
was to
phil-openssl-users> | phil-openssl-users> build critical programs like OpenSSH
statically so
phil-openssl-users> | phil-openssl-users> they had no dependency on the shared library.
phil-openssl-users> |
phil-openssl-users> | That doesn't matter. OpenSSH detects a difference in the shared
phil-openssl-users> | library, down to the patch level, so whenever you upgrade
OpenSSL,
phil-openssl-users> | even within the same "series", OpenSSH will stop working. That's
phil-openssl-users> | their choice, and I can understand it.
phil-openssl-users>
phil-openssl-users> If you understand it, could you explain that
phil-openssl-users> understanding? Is it because of the API changes?
It's a direct reaction on our failure to keep backward compatibility
within the 0.9.6 series.
phil-openssl-users> I guess I need to continue to build OpenSSH
phil-openssl-users> statically. And if their choice persist even
phil-openssl-users> after OpenSSL 1.0.0, that may have to be forever.
I really hope we earn a bit more trust by then :-).
--
Richard Levitte \ Spannv�gen 38, II \ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Redakteur@Stacken \ S-168 35 BROMMA \ T: +46-8-26 52 47
\ SWEDEN \ or +46-708-26 53 44
Procurator Odiosus Ex Infernis -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Member of the OpenSSL development team: http://www.openssl.org/
Unsolicited commercial email is subject to an archival fee of $400.
See <http://www.stacken.kth.se/~levitte/mail/> for more info.
______________________________________________________________________
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
User Support Mailing List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Automated List Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED]
