> -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Mon, 16 Dec > 2002 21:30:46 +0100, Andy Polyakov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > > appro> > Just take the lib*.a and relink it > appro> > explicitly: > appro> > mkdir tmp; cd tmp; ar x ../libcrypto.a; ld > -r -o ../libcrypto.o *.o > appro> > ld -G -o libcrypto.so libcrypto.o -l<whatever> > appro> > appro> As mentioned calling /usr/ccs/bin/ld *is* an > alternative. Or is it? > appro> Imagine following scenario. You compile the toolkit > with gcc and link > appro> with ld as you suggest. This might leave unresolved > references to > appro> libgcc. Now if it did, then attempt to cc ... -lssl > would fail... A. > > OK, I lied a message ago. In 0.9.8-dev's Makefile.shared, the first > ld is actually an ld, while the second shown above is done through cc > or gcc. Right. The first line must use ld to create the relocatable object, the final link can be done by cc / gcc / ld, whichever, as appropriate. -- Howard Chu Chief Architect, Symas Corp. Director, Highland Sun http://www.symas.com http://highlandsun.com/hyc Symas: Premier OpenSource Development and Support ______________________________________________________________________ OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org Development Mailing List [EMAIL PROTECTED] Automated List Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED]
