Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker wrote:
>
> From: Dr S N Henson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> drh> Wwrt this "reorganisation": provided it doesn't mean that adding or
> drh> deleting a single function could potentially result in a large portion
> drh> of the .num file being reordered on the next "make update" then that's
> drh> OK by me.
>
> I'd say that we can have mkdef.pl take another argument, say
> "release", where it will simply cut libeay.num and ssleay.num after
> the last release max slot number and reinsert all functions that are
> above it, unless they have disappeared. Is that good enough not to
> make you jump up and down in frustration? :-)
>
Yes, that sounds good. I don't generally jump up and down in frustration
unless I can find some relevant person to jump up and down on :-)
Steve.
--
Dr Stephen N. Henson. http://www.drh-consultancy.demon.co.uk/
Personal Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Senior crypto engineer, Celo Communications: http://www.celocom.com/
Core developer of the OpenSSL project: http://www.openssl.org/
Business Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] PGP key: via homepage.
______________________________________________________________________
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
Development Mailing List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Automated List Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED]
