mains in effect. Do I understand
that binary compatibility for shared libraries is expected since 1.0 release?
Vladimir
-Original Message-
From: Andy Polyakov via RT [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2003 3:14 PM
To: Shklover, Vladimir
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject:
-Original Message-
From: Rich Salz via RT [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, January 22, 2003 11:15 AM
To: Shklover, Vladimir
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [openssl.org #463] PATCH
> 2)Perhaps I did not make it clear but our policy is not to include
> any cryptographic so
-Original Message-
From: Rich Salz via RT [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, January 22, 2003 11:15 AM
To: Shklover, Vladimir
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [openssl.org #463] PATCH
> 2)Perhaps I did not make it clear but our policy is not to include
> any cryptographic so
> 2)Perhaps I did not make it clear but our policy is not to include
> any cryptographic software directly into our applications.
You might want to reconsider this policy. Do you expect much revenue
from the banned country list? Is it worth the development and support
cost of keeping track w
2)Perhaps I did not make it clear but our policy is not to include
any cryptographic software directly into our applications.
You might want to reconsider this policy. Do you expect much revenue
from the banned country list? Is it worth the development and support
cost of keeping track with o
mains in effect. Do I understand
that binary compatibility for shared libraries is expected since 1.0 release?
Vladimir
-Original Message-
From: Andy Polyakov via RT [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2003 3:14 PM
To: Shklover, Vladimir
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject:
> 1)I just got aix64-cc shared build succeed with -bautoexp. It was possible to
> modify Makefile pretty similar to aix43-cc.
^^ But the challenge is to construct the rule which can be
parametrized through configure line. But as already mentioned, I'd
appreciate if you could verify if 'env O
PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [openssl.org #463] PATCH
1)I just got aix64-cc shared build succeed with -bautoexp. It was possible to
modify Makefile pretty similar to aix43-cc.
***
SHARED_LD
riginal Message-
From: Andy Polyakov via RT [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2003 9:51 AM
To: Shklover, Vladimir
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [openssl.org #463] PATCH
As you don't appear to be interested in 64-bit build I've decided to
settle for following.
As you don't appear to be interested in 64-bit build I've decided to
settle for following. We leave the code as is [as in
openssl-0.9.7-stable-SNAP-20030119.tar.gz or later] and document the
aix64-cc case in PROBLEMS in wait for more appropriate solution
(covering even gcc:-). BTW. Can use verify
> 1)Unless I understood you correctly, could you please send me
> the complete implementation for aix-shared which you want.
You have to understand that I don't have access to AIX machine and
therefore can't be completely sure what I actually want. What I asked in
previous letter is to run the co
aries for versions 0.9.6
and 0.9.7 seem to be compatible on solaris and linux but not on AIX.
Vladimir
-Original Message-
From: Andy Polyakov via RT [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, January 20, 2003 4:23 PM
To: Shklover, Vladimir
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [openssl.org #46
Wrong button again? I wasn't ready with it...
> > It builds shared libraries indeed!
>
> Can you test one last thing. Assuming that you have the tree configured
> with './Configure aix64-cc shared' left. Would following work:
>
> cc -q64 -Wl,-bnogc,-bautoexp,
'cc -q64 -qmkshrobj -o libcrypto.s
T [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2003 2:25 PM
> To: Shklover, Vladimir
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [openssl.org #463] PATCH
>
> > Similar result:
> >
> > + ld -b64 -r -o libcrypto.o -bnogc libcrypto.a
> > + nm -Pg libcrypto.o
>
-
From: Andy Polyakov via RT [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, January 20, 2003 2:25 PM
To: Shklover, Vladimir
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [openssl.org #463] PATCH
> Similar result:
>
> + ld -b64 -r -o libcrypto.o -bnogc libcrypto.a
> + nm -Pg libcrypto.o
> + gr
> Similar result:
>
> + ld -b64 -r -o libcrypto.o -bnogc libcrypto.a
> + nm -Pg libcrypto.o
> + grep [BD]
> + cut -f1 -d
> + 1> libcrypto.exp
> 0654-210 libcrypto.o is not valid in the current object file mode.
> Use the -X option to specify the desired object mode.
> + cc -q64 -G -bE:li
mir
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [openssl.org #463] PATCH
> ./Configure aix64-cc ... shared - build fails with
> only libcrypto.a built (no libssl.a) and message
> + ld -r -o libcrypto.o -bnogc libcrypto.a
> ld: 0711-245 WARNING: No csects or exported sy
> ./Configure aix64-cc ... shared - build fails with
> only libcrypto.a built (no libssl.a) and message
> + ld -r -o libcrypto.o -bnogc libcrypto.a
> ld: 0711-245 WARNING: No csects or exported symbols have been saved.
> + nm -Pg libcrypto.o
> + grep [BD]
> + cut -f1 -d
> + 1
On Mon, 20 Jan 2003, Shklover, Vladimir via RT wrote:
>
> I tested aix builds of
> ftp://ftp.openssl.org/snapshot/openssl-0.9.7-stable-SNAP-20030118.tar.gz
>
> The results:
>
> ---
> ./Configure aix43-cc ... shared - s
tead of "./Configure solaris-sparcv9-[cc/gcc] ..."), it fails unless
Makefile.ssl is manually modified (this less important though).
Vladimir
-Original Message-
From: Andy Polyakov via RT [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Saturday, January 18, 2003 7:25 AM
To: Shklover, Vladimir
Cc: [EMAIL
??? I wasn't ready with it... Pressed wrong button...
> 1)I didn't give any preference to aix-cc;
But you've suggested to change it:-)
> I just changed
> in config script the default CC=gcc
It would be possible to fix even gcc shared build, if we had -bautoexp
and no hardcoded SHAREDFLAGS. It
)I have copied my original message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> and was assigned a bug number; I don't know if it was necessary.
>
> Thank you very much for your attention,
> Vladimir
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Andy Polyakov via RT [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> rt> > rt> To mainly. How come did do_aix-shared deserve so special
> rt> > rt> treatment? I mean SHAREDFLAGS being hardcoded directly in Makefile.org?
> rt> > rt> Just wondering...
> rt> >
> rt> > Well, that one is an experiment.
> rt>
> rt> Then why AIX specific flags like -bnogc, -bE:lib$$i.e
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Sat, 18 Jan 2003 00:01:39
+0100 (MET), "Andy Polyakov via RT" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
rt> > rt> To mainly. How come did do_aix-shared deserve so special
rt> > rt> treatment? I mean SHAREDFLAGS being hardcoded directly in Makefile.org?
rt> > rt> Just wondering
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Sat, 18 Jan 2003 00:01:39
+0100 (MET), "Andy Polyakov via RT" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
rt> > rt> To mainly. How come did do_aix-shared deserve so special
rt> > rt> treatment? I mean SHAREDFLAGS being hardcoded directly in Makefile.org?
rt> > rt> Just wondering.
003 4:27 PM
To: Shklover, Vladimir
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [openssl.org #463] PATCH
> Current version,
> openssl-0.9.7, does not support shared libraries on AIX platform.
To mainly. How come did do_aix-shared deserve so special
treatment? I mean SHAREDFLAGS being hardcoded dire
> rt> To mainly. How come did do_aix-shared deserve so special
> rt> treatment? I mean SHAREDFLAGS being hardcoded directly in Makefile.org?
> rt> Just wondering...
>
> Well, that one is an experiment.
Then why AIX specific flags like -bnogc, -bE:lib$$i.exp, -bM:SRE?
> rt> > and "aix43-cc".
>
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Fri, 17 Jan 2003 23:26:40
+0100 (MET), "Andy Polyakov via RT" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
rt> > Current version,
rt> > openssl-0.9.7, does not support shared libraries on AIX platform.
rt>
rt> To mainly. How come did do_aix-shared deserve so special
rt> treatmen
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Fri, 17 Jan 2003 23:26:40
+0100 (MET), "Andy Polyakov via RT" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
rt> > Current version,
rt> > openssl-0.9.7, does not support shared libraries on AIX platform.
rt>
rt> To mainly. How come did do_aix-shared deserve so special
rt> treatment
> Current version,
> openssl-0.9.7, does not support shared libraries on AIX platform.
To mainly. How come did do_aix-shared deserve so special
treatment? I mean SHAREDFLAGS being hardcoded directly in Makefile.org?
Just wondering...
> I am sending you the changes
> which allow to generate shar
30 matches
Mail list logo
