> The other one is that after it has compiled for quite some time and are
> ready to build the openssl-binary it terminates with the following
> output (after a ./config no-asm; make clean; make ):
> 
>         cc -o openssl -DMONOLITH -I../include -DTHREADS -D_REENTRANT
> -DB_ENDIAN -DBN_DIV2W -Ae +ESlit +O4 -z openssl.o verify.o asn1pars.o
> req.o dgst.o dh.o enc.o gendh.o errstr.o ca.o  pkcs7.o crl2p7.o crl.o
> rsa.o dsa.o dsaparam.o  x509.o genrsa.o gendsa.o s_server.o s_client.o
> speed.o  s_time.o apps.o s_cb.o s_socket.o version.o sess_id.o
> ciphers.o nseq.o pkcs12.o -L. -L.. -L../.. -L../../.. -L.. -lssl -L..
> -lcrypto
> /usr/ccs/bin/ld: (Warning) At least one PA 2.0 object file (openssl.o)
> was detected. The linked output may not run on a PA 1.x system.
> ucomp :
>    Error at line 0  : memory exhausted at 65536 Kbytes; try increasing
> swap space or the maxdsiz kernel parameter (8203)
> *** Error exit code 254
> 
It's not an openssl bug and you simply should take the ucomp's advice
literally and increase maxdsiz kernel parameter.
> 
> I've compiled lots of other stuff, so I'm pretty sure that my compiler
> isn't broken.
The only openssl's "sin" is that it's big enough to drive the ucomp up
on the wall with +O4 optimization level:
> From: Mixmaster
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> +O4 enables link time global optimizations over the whole executable, beyond
> the file level optimization that is done during compilation.  That
> global optimization takes a long long time on a library with this many
> functions in it, which is why your make seemed to hang.  Be patient and
> it'll finish eventually.
> 
> The global optimizations include automatic inlining of functions, which
> isn't always safe but is safe in this case. ...
Another alternative is to drop optimization level...

Cheers. Andy.
______________________________________________________________________
OpenSSL Project                                 http://www.openssl.org
Development Mailing List                       [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Automated List Manager                           [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to