Am 08.08.2012 07:39, schrieb Kaspar Brand:
On 06.08.2012 22:08, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
On 8/5/2012 10:10 PM, Kaspar Brand wrote:
On 05.08.2012 14:38, Guenter Knauf wrote:
Am 05.08.2012 10:10, schrieb Kaspar Brand:
1) use --with-ssl-builddir for linking with the static OpenSSL libraries
in that directory (and ignore --with-ssl in this case)
what about splitting into two arguments:
--with-ssl-include=
--with-ssl-lib=
this would be equal to what many other configure also use ...
That's an option, yes, although the way the proposed option would work
doesn't mirror the typical case of --with-xyz-include/--with-xyz-lib
(i.e., add those args with -I and -L): "--with-ssl-builddir" forces
mod_ssl to always be linked with the static libraries in that directory.
Maybe --with-ssl-static-libdir would be a more appropriate name?
Why not simply consume the installed openssl.pc?
In this particular case we're talking about using an OpenSSL build
directory, i.e. the generated openssl.pc is sitting in a temporary
location in that build tree (and when used, would output incorrect
includedir/libdir locations).
probably a dumb question and I'm missing something, but:
why is this necessary at all? Given someone wants to build/link against
a development version of OpenSSL why should he ommit the last step of
installing OpenSSL to a separate location? Wouldnt everything work fine
using --with-ssl= and building OpenSSL static-only + installing to a
separate development location?
Gün.
