Re: [PATCH] openssl shared libraries under Fujitsu-Siemens ReliantUNIX

[Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker]

From: "Robert Dahlem" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Robert.Dahlem> >[...]
Robert.Dahlem> >          ld -r -o $$i.o $(ALLSYMSFLAG) lib$$i.a && \
Robert.Dahlem> >[...]
Robert.Dahlem> 
Robert.Dahlem> >Please note the 'ld -r'.  That's apparently the way to build one giant
Robert.Dahlem> >.o file from a library or a number of smaller .o files.
Robert.Dahlem> 
Robert.Dahlem> Here are my $0.02 on that:
Robert.Dahlem> 
Robert.Dahlem> I don't understand (yet) why one should bother which
Robert.Dahlem> each and every systems idea (better: each combination
Robert.Dahlem> of OS and compiler) of how to get back the code from
Robert.Dahlem> some libXXX.a and stuff in into libXXX.so and trying to
Robert.Dahlem> do this in one complicated non-portable step.

As a matter of fact,it looks like 'ld -r' *is* rather portable among
the unixen I've looked at.

Robert.Dahlem> It seems far less complicated to me to just unpack all
Robert.Dahlem> those .o files we have from libXXX.a ("$AR x" should
Robert.Dahlem> always do the job) and then bind them together into a
Robert.Dahlem> shared object with what the system offers. Using this
Robert.Dahlem> pretty generic way you only need the information how to
Robert.Dahlem> produce a shared object and that's it.

I guess it's my sense of esthetics (sp?) that has been in the way so
far.  I actually dislike the above method as well and much prefer the
versions of ld that can produced a .so file with a .a file as input
and that's it.  Unfortuntely, that isn't supported everywhere,so for
me, the above is the next best variant.

Anyway, your comment is not really an answer to my question :-).

-- 
Richard Levitte   \ Spannv�gen 38, II \ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Redakteur@Stacken  \ S-168 35  BROMMA  \ T: +46-8-26 52 47
                    \      SWEDEN       \ or +46-733-72 88 11
Procurator Odiosus Ex Infernis                -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Member of the OpenSSL development team: http://www.openssl.org/
Software Engineer, GemPlus:             http://www.gemplus.com/

Unsolicited commercial email is subject to an archival fee of $400.
See <http://www.stacken.kth.se/~levitte/mail/> for more info.
______________________________________________________________________
OpenSSL Project                                 http://www.openssl.org
Development Mailing List                       [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Automated List Manager                           [EMAIL PROTECTED]