In message <11032216192727_20200...@antinode.info> on Tue, 22 Mar 2011 16:19:27 -0500 (CDT), "Steven M. Schweda" <s...@antinode.info> said:
sms> > 64 Automatic choice of "64" or "64=ARGV". sms> > 64=ARGV Manual choice of "64=ARGV". sms> > 64= Manual choice of plain "64". sms> sms> Seems to be done, and the compiler test activity no longer leaves sms> junk object and/or listing files lying around. Original (*.*_orig) and sms> changed files (with VMS version numbers) should be available here: sms> sms> http://antinode.info/ftp/openssl/1_0_0d/openssl-SNAP-20110321_s1.zip Just to clarify, you used openssl-SNAP-20110321.tar.gz for this? That's a different branch than the one 1.0.0d comes from... The way it's set up, we currently maintain the following branches: - OpenSSL_0_9_8-stable, which is version 0.9.8x (x = any letter), resulting in snapshot openssl-0.9.8-stable-SNAP-<date>.tar.gz - OpenSSL_1_0_0-stable, which is version 1.0.0x (x = any letter), resulting in snapshot openssl-1.0.0-stable-SNAP-<date>.tar.gz - OpenSSL_1_0_1-stable, which is version 1.0.1x (x = any letter), resulting in snapshot openssl-1.0.1-stable-SNAP-<date>.tar.gz - HEAD, which is version 1.1.0-dev, resulting in snapshot openssl-SNAP-<date>.tar.gz If you worked on 1.0.0d before and now played with HEAD, it must be confusing. There are some differences... sms> ssl/dtls1.h Someone keeps adding stuff like: sms> sms> /* Unless _XOPEN_SOURCE_EXTENDED is defined, struct timeval will not be sms> properly defined with DEC C, at least on VMS */ sms> #if defined(__DECC) || defined(__DECCXX) sms> #define _XOPEN_SOURCE_EXTENDED sms> #endif sms> sms> I keep getting compiler complaints because of it: sms> sms> [...] sms> Building The SSLTEST Test Program. sms> sms> #define _XOPEN_SOURCE_EXTENDED 1 /* Or gethostname won't be declared properly sms> ................................^ sms> %CC-W-MACROREDEF, The redefinition of the macro "_XOPEN_SOURCE_EXTENDED" sms> conflicts with a current definition because the replacement lists sms> differ. The redefinition is now in effect. sms> at line number 189 in file sms> IT$DKC0:[UTILITY.SOURCE.OPENSSL.openssl-SNAP-20110321.ssl]ssltest.c;1 sms> [...] sms> sms> So I keep taking it out. I need more info than "DEC C, at least sms> on VMS" to understand what the problem is, wherever it is, if sms> there actually is one. I don't see it around here, where the sms> "cure" always seems to be worse than the disease. I've seen the compiler complain that struct timeval isn't defined. sms> util/libeay.num As usual, these guys were mismatched with sms> util/ssleay.num reality, especially where VMS uses shortened sms> names ("crypto/symhacks.h"). (And we ain't got sms> no 128-bit integers, so "EC_GFp_nistp224_method" sms> had to be tossed out.) I added a helpful comment sms> section at the end of each file, and enhanced sms> "VMS/mkshared.com" to include the concept of a sms> comment, so that it could ignore these new sms> comments. If these ".num" files are actually sms> created automatically, then these changes may sms> make little sense. Similarly, if there's some sms> other consumer who reads these files, then he sms> needs to ignore the comments, too. (Or else, the sms> comments need to be removed, but if these files sms> are being hand-edited (carelessly), then it's sms> just possible that some comments might save us sms> from some of these recurring shortened-name sms> problems. The proper way to handle this is with "make update" on Unix. I need to remember to use mkshared.com to see the problem, thanks for the reminder. I'll have a look at your zip. -- Richard Levitte rich...@levitte.org http://richard.levitte.org/ "Life is a tremendous celebration - and I'm invited!" -- from a friend's blog, translated from Swedish ______________________________________________________________________ OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org Development Mailing List openssl-dev@openssl.org Automated List Manager majord...@openssl.org
