Dr Stephen Henson wrote:
>
> Ben Laurie wrote:
> >
> > What are we going to do about them? They are currently slapped on the
> > end of Makefile.ssl in the traditional way, but of course this causes a
> > problem with CVS.
> >
> > Developing without them is a bugger, of course, so I don't consider that
> > to be an option.
> >
> > Arrange things so Makefile is a copy of Makefile.ssl instead of a link,
> > perhaps?
> >
> > Use includes?
> >
>
> OK lets see if this works...
>
> As I mentioned before you can get nastier problems with error codes. If
> you add one new error code and do a "make errors" you end up modifying
> several files: you can ignore all of these except the .h file which is
> part auto-generated part "real" source.
>
> Hmm what you said gives me an idea. Have a static .org or whatever file
> with a "stripped" version of the .h file and then have the .h file build
> from the .org. The .h can then be ignored.
Isn't that how its done already? But anyway, that wasn't what I meant -
I mean how do we deal with the result of doing a "make depend", which
alters all the Makefiles...
Cheers,
Ben.
--
Ben Laurie |Phone: +44 (181) 735 0686| Apache Group member
Freelance Consultant |Fax: +44 (181) 735 0689|http://www.apache.org/
and Technical Director|Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] |
A.L. Digital Ltd, |Apache-SSL author http://www.apache-ssl.org/
London, England. |"Apache: TDG" http://www.ora.com/catalog/apache/
______________________________________________________________________
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
Development Mailing List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Automated List Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED]
