Re: [openssl-dev] Question about dynamically loadable engines on Cygwin / Mingw

In message <56c27dc0.3030...@oracle.com> on Tue, 16 Feb 2016 01:39:12 +, Jeremy Farrell said: jeremy.farrell> Thanks Richard - it was just a thought, and clearly not a very helpful jeremy.farrell> one. The rest of the proposal looks like a good improvement to

Re: [openssl-dev] Question about dynamically loadable engines on Cygwin / Mingw

On 15/02/2016 23:16, Richard Levitte wrote: In message <20160215.185953.117619649162395329.levi...@openssl.org> on Mon, 15 Feb 2016 18:59:53 +0100 (CET), Richard Levitte said: levitte> In message <56c210e7.5080...@oracle.com> on Mon, 15 Feb 2016 17:54:47 +, Jeremy

Re: [openssl-dev] Question about dynamically loadable engines on Cygwin / Mingw

In message <20160215.185953.117619649162395329.levi...@openssl.org> on Mon, 15 Feb 2016 18:59:53 +0100 (CET), Richard Levitte said: levitte> In message <56c210e7.5080...@oracle.com> on Mon, 15 Feb 2016 17:54:47 +, Jeremy Farrell said:

Re: [openssl-dev] Question about dynamically loadable engines on Cygwin / Mingw

In message <56c210e7.5080...@oracle.com> on Mon, 15 Feb 2016 17:54:47 +, Jeremy Farrell said: jeremy.farrell> jeremy.farrell> jeremy.farrell> On 15/02/2016 12:29, Richard Levitte wrote: jeremy.farrell> > In message <20160215122509.ga15...@calimero.vinschen.de>

Re: [openssl-dev] Question about dynamically loadable engines on Cygwin / Mingw

On 15/02/2016 12:29, Richard Levitte wrote: In message <20160215122509.ga15...@calimero.vinschen.de> on Mon, 15 Feb 2016 13:25:09 +0100, Corinna Vinschen said: vinschen> On Feb 15 13:03, Richard Levitte wrote: vinschen> > So here is what I'm thinking... vinschen> >

Re: [openssl-dev] Question about dynamically loadable engines on Cygwin / Mingw

In message <20160215122509.ga15...@calimero.vinschen.de> on Mon, 15 Feb 2016 13:25:09 +0100, Corinna Vinschen said: vinschen> On Feb 15 13:03, Richard Levitte wrote: vinschen> > So here is what I'm thinking... vinschen> > vinschen> > - engines in 1.1 should be named

Re: [openssl-dev] Question about dynamically loadable engines on Cygwin / Mingw

On Feb 15 13:03, Richard Levitte wrote: > So here is what I'm thinking... > > - engines in 1.1 should be named FOO.{suffix} (for an engine FOO and > whatever suffix is conventional on the platform at hand, be it .so, > .dll, .sl, .dylib...) > - the OpenSSL DSO module should be changed to have

Re: [openssl-dev] Question about dynamically loadable engines on Cygwin / Mingw

In message <20160215113936.ga9...@calimero.vinschen.de> on Mon, 15 Feb 2016 12:39:36 +0100, Corinna Vinschen said: vinschen> On Feb 15 12:11, Richard Levitte wrote: vinschen> > Hi Corinna, vinschen> > vinschen> > In message <20160215105045.ga7...@calimero.vinschen.de> on

Re: [openssl-dev] Question about dynamically loadable engines on Cygwin / Mingw

On Feb 15 12:11, Richard Levitte wrote: > Hi Corinna, > > In message <20160215105045.ga7...@calimero.vinschen.de> on Mon, 15 Feb 2016 > 11:50:45 +0100, Corinna Vinschen said: > > vinschen> > Cygwin: cygcapi.dll > vinschen> > vinschen> I can't speak for Mingw, but on

Re: [openssl-dev] Question about dynamically loadable engines on Cygwin / Mingw

Hi Corinna, In message <20160215105045.ga7...@calimero.vinschen.de> on Mon, 15 Feb 2016 11:50:45 +0100, Corinna Vinschen said: vinschen> > Cygwin: cygcapi.dll vinschen> vinschen> I can't speak for Mingw, but on Cygwin the modules are called libFOO.so, vinschen> e.g.

Re: [openssl-dev] Question about dynamically loadable engines on Cygwin / Mingw

Hi Richard, On Feb 15 01:11, Richard Levitte wrote: > Hi, > > I've got a question to the Cygwin / Mingw community, regarding the > naming of dynamic engines. > > >From looking at Makefile.shared et al, the engines get the same kind > of prefixes as a standard shared library (but without the

Re: [openssl-dev] Question about dynamically loadable engines on Cygwin / Mingw

Possibly the best fix is to simply not specify the library prefix or suffix.i.e. -engine capiAnd let OS/build specific code sort out the rest. You still have .so and .sl on different variants of HP/UX for example.Next best, specify the complete library name in all cases - and I'll concede, best

[openssl-dev] Question about dynamically loadable engines on Cygwin / Mingw

Hi, I've got a question to the Cygwin / Mingw community, regarding the naming of dynamic engines. >From looking at Makefile.shared et al, the engines get the same kind of prefixes as a standard shared library (but without the accompanying import library, of course). So the capi engine gets