On Thu, Apr 16, 2015 at 06:42:04AM +0200, Kaspar Brand wrote: > On 15.04.2015 18:36, Stefan Sperling wrote: > > However, the actual issue here is that mod_ssl is squatting the SSL_ > > namespace. > > Historically this may have made sense (it seems mod_ssl and OpenSSL have > > shared history/authors). Bill Rowe suggested to try moving mod_ssl's > > functions into the ap_ namespace to avoid such clashes in the future. > > Agreed that mod_ssl should avoid stepping into the SSL_* yard. As > pointed out by Jeff, ap_* is fairly foreign in the mod_ssl case, though, > and my preference is for s/SSL_/ssl_/ for functions and > s/SSL_/MODSSL_/ for constants (in the latter case, there's actually > quite some more stuff lurking - SSL_OPT_*, SSL_PROTOCOL_* etc.).
It would be safer to go with a "modssl_" prefix for functions too, I've sometimes tried to use that for new things though probably not consistently. OpenSSL's libssl.so does export symbols using the "ssl_" prefix, though they are probably all internal things which shouldn't be global. Regards, Joe
