On Mon, Mar 04, 2002 at 02:48:46PM +0100, Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker wrote: > From: John Viega <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > viega> I think it's a good idea to make algorithms easy to cut out. > > I disagree. We currently have a rather big compatibility mess with > libdes for the simple reason that libdes exists both as it's own > library and as part of SSLeay/OpenSSL. Unfortunately, certain things, > like the definition of DES_LONG, differ between libdes and > SSLeay/OpenSSL on some platforms. Not good.
Is this because they are maintained separately? > I'm not sure why you need to yank out source when it's just as easy to > link with libcrypto and make sure you only use the specific > algorithms. In such a case, one should avoid using things like > EVP_get_cipherbyname() since that requires that all compiled > algorithms be linked in. I was thinking more of environments where dynamic linking doesn't exist, or everything you need has to be stored in a limited amount of space like a floppy or some sort of solid-state memory device. This is somewhat common. Off the top of my head, I don't see why a well-organized library couldn't have well-compartmentalized algorithms that can be easily ripped out, yet are all accessible through a generic interface such as EVP. That is, I don't see any disadvantage to such an approach, especially if there's no fear of people breaking out little parts and maintaining them separately. John ______________________________________________________________________ OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org Development Mailing List [EMAIL PROTECTED] Automated List Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED]
