On Thu, Apr 22, 1999 at 07:30:15PM +0200, Anonymous wrote:
[...]
> Moving everything to /usr/local/ssl/include/openssl doesn't make much sense
> though.
> - That will leave /usr/local/ssl/include empty except for the subdir.
True, but that shouldn't hurt anyone. It's just another inode.
> - Hypothetical conflicts with other libraries are already taken care of by
> having the openssl includes in a separate place and using
> -I/usr/local/ssl/include.
As long as you don't try to use OpenSSL and a conflicting libary for
the same program. I think someone reported a problem of that type.
> - It'll require source code changes in all existing applications (makefiles).
This is a bit annoying, but to compile an application that was written
for an earlier library version, adding a compiler option
-I/usr/local/ssl/include/openssl would be enough. So it's not much of
a problem really.
> To me, moving the includes only makes sense if we're going to get rid of
> /usr/local/ssl entirely and instead put things in /usr/local/bin,
> /usr/local/lib, and /usr/local/include/openssl (what should happen to certs
> and private?).
I'd prefer to keep OpenSSL in one place (which conventionally is
/usr/local/ssl, though some might prefer /opt/[open]ssl) instead of
distributing it all over the directory tree. Then the link from
/usr/local/include/openssl helps to find the other stuff. Installing
the openssl binary in /usr/local/bin makes sense, I usually set
symbolics links for that too.
______________________________________________________________________
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
Development Mailing List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Automated List Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED]
