Quietly re-rejecting this. the longer-term plan is the C version builtin to the
openssl command.
__
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
Development Mailing List
On Tue 26 Aug 2014 04:31:07 Rich Salz via RT wrote:
The sad thing is, perl is widely available than posix shell. cool hack tho.
i don't think that's really true. else, why is autoconf friends relying on
a shell and not perl ? those see way more distribution than openssl.
-mike
On Tue 26 Aug 2014 04:31:07 Rich Salz via RT wrote:
The sad thing is, perl is widely available than posix shell. cool hack tho.
i don't think that's really true. else, why is autoconf friends relying on
a shell and not perl ? those see way more distribution than openssl.
-mike
i don't think that's really true. else, why is autoconf friends relying on
a
shell and not perl ? those see way more distribution than openssl.
Last I looked, autoconf doesn't use anything that really wasn't in Version 7
Bourne shell. In my comment, I deliberately used the term posix
i don't think that's really true. else, why is autoconf friends relying on
a
shell and not perl ? those see way more distribution than openssl.
Last I looked, autoconf doesn't use anything that really wasn't in Version 7
Bourne shell. In my comment, I deliberately used the term posix
On Wed 27 Aug 2014 15:24:45 Salz, Rich via RT wrote:
i don't think that's really true. else, why is autoconf friends relying
on a shell and not perl ? those see way more distribution than openssl.
Last I looked, autoconf doesn't use anything that really wasn't in Version 7
Bourne shell.
On Wed 27 Aug 2014 15:24:45 Salz, Rich via RT wrote:
i don't think that's really true. else, why is autoconf friends relying
on a shell and not perl ? those see way more distribution than openssl.
Last I looked, autoconf doesn't use anything that really wasn't in Version 7
Bourne shell.
These all first appeared in ksh: functions, local, return, $((math))
But to my mind, the question is moot, since post-1.0.2 we'll almost
definitely have c_rehash builtin to the openssl command.
that would also work
:)
It will also be much much much faster, since it doesn't have to call
These all first appeared in ksh: functions, local, return, $((math))
But to my mind, the question is moot, since post-1.0.2 we'll almost
definitely have c_rehash builtin to the openssl command.
that would also work
:)
It will also be much much much faster, since it doesn't have to call
The sad thing is, perl is widely available than posix shell. cool hack tho.
--
Rich Salz, OpenSSL dev team; rs...@openssl.org
__
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
Development Mailing List
while openssl requires perl in order to compile, nothing that it installs
requires perl at runtime. that is except for the simple c_rehash script.
for such a simple wrapper, i dont think the perl requirement is justified.
fortunately, the PLD Linux guys have already rewritten things in POSIX
11 matches
Mail list logo
