On Wed, 27 Sep 2006 David.Comay at sun.com wrote:
>> There might be a problem if any consumer used a full path for OpenSSL
>> binary /usr/sfw/bin/openssl or libraries so that's another situation
>> that will have to be checked with all consumers.
>
> [ my apologies, one additional question ]
>
> Besides the proposed symbolic link for /etc/sfw/openssl, does the
> project plan to introduce any others such as one for
> /usr/sfw/bin/openssl or other OpenSSL commands delivered under
> /usr/sfw/bin?
my intention is not to do that if I'm allowed not to. I know that
that will break scripts that use full path /usr/sfw/bin/openssl - so, can I
do that (= force people to fix such scripts) with reference to the fact that
we are moving it to the default PATH location from a non default one?
Jan.
--
Jan Pechanec
