On Sun, 12 Jan 2003, Andy Polyakov wrote:
> > > > I tried this patch on DJGPP both as normally compiled and also using
> > > > the asm modules (put ${x86_out_asm} in the DJGPP config-string
> > > ^^^^^^^^^^^ Oh! I missed that. I mean the fact that they are not
> > > actually engaged in the default configuration. Any particular reason
> > > why?
> >
> > The only reason is to maintain 386 compatibility. The last time I
> > asked (I think it was about a year ago), there was a question as to
> > whether 386 incompatible instructions were used in the asm files, even
> > if "386" was specified in the Configure options.
>
> If you './Configure ... DJGPP 386', then pure 386 asm code will be
> generated. Well, it's all about single instruction, bswapl to be
> specific... A.
In that case, it probably makes sense to make the asm code the
default in DJGPP also. This should just take a change in the DJGPP
config-string in Configure to put ${x86_out_asm} into the (currently
blank) next field after ${x86_gcc_opts}.
Doug
--
Doug Kaufman
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
______________________________________________________________________
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
Development Mailing List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Automated List Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED]
