> Bill Janssen wrote: > [snip] > > Do you have an opinion on the initial proposal of applink.c? The > proposal does neither seem harmful nor problematic but I also don't see > how it is going to help the op. > > Christian
I know nothing about it -- it's a Windows thing. But reading the note at http://www.openssl.org/support/faq.html, I can see why Windows developers might like to have it: ``Note that debug and release libraries are NOT interchangeable. If you built OpenSSL with /MD your application must use /MD and cannot use /MDd. ``As per 0.9.8 the above limitation is eliminated for .DLLs. OpenSSL .DLLs compiled with some specific run-time option [we insist on the default /MD] can be deployed with application compiled with different option or even different compiler. But there is a catch! Instead of re-compiling OpenSSL toolkit, as you would have to with prior versions, you have to compile small C snippet with compiler and/or options of your choice. The snippet gets installed as <install-root>/include/openssl/applink.c and should be either added to your application project or simply #include-d in one [and only one] of your application source files. Failure to link this shim module into your application manifests itself as fatal "no OPENSSL_Applink" run-time error. An explicit reminder is due that in this situation [mixing compiler options] it is as important to add CRYPTO_malloc_init prior first call to OpenSSL.'' Bill _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
