Good day Tom,

Checking the activestate site, Net::SSLeay isn't available for Win32 via
PPM at the moment.  If you've got access to some kind of development
system, you can try compiling it up yourself.  I've never tried this, so
can't say if it would work or not.

As an alternative, you can try installing Cygwin (which provides a unix
subsystem to Windows, and it works very nicely!), and then compiling it up
under that.  The problem with this is that you won't be able to
mix-and-match any compiled perl modules from the normal Activestate perl,
and the version of perl compiled under Cygwin, so you'd need to duplicate
some of the installed modules.  If you want to look into this, you can get
cygwin from http://sources.redhat.com/cygwin/

Take care,
Mark.

On Tue, 10 Jul 2001, Tom Savino wrote:

> Do you know where I can get Net::SSLeay for foe the win32? thanks....
> -------------------------------------------------------------
> 
>                      Tom Savino
>                            CEO
>                  2Tone Web Design
>  "The Only Limitation Is The Imagination"
>   "Learn The Truth It Will Set You Free"
>              Phone:   727-323-9320
>                  Cell:   727-418-HOST
>          Toll Free:   1-866-298-HOST
>                  Fax:   1-815-550-7317
>         http://www.2tonewebdesign.com
>         http://www.2tonedomains.com
>         http://www.irstruth.com
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "Robert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc: "Opensrs-Dev" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Tuesday, July 10, 2001 11:42 AM
> Subject: Re: Is it sslbot, or is it something else? I can only get up to end
> of May domains?
> 
> 
> >
> > > Perhaps there has been some changes that I've mised. Running sslbot
> doesn't
> > > return the domains for June or July. I can only see up to May?
> >
> > The version at http://www.daze.net/opensrs/opensrs.sslbot2.pl.txt is still
> > working correctly.  In our case, it is pulling all domains from January
> > 2000 to current (including June and July 2001).
> >
> > -Bill
> >
> >
> >
> 
> 
> 
> 

Reply via email to