On Oct 22, 2013 10:28 AM, "Ben Laurie" <[email protected]> wrote: > On 22 October 2013 06:47, Nico Williams <[email protected]> wrote: >> What I need to know: >> >> - should i add new targets to ./Configure? for now I modified the linux-elf target, but this feels wrong to me. >> >> - what about Windows? I either need to have different targets for pre-vista/2008 or. i have to write a once initialization function for older Windows (which I can and know how to do, it's just more work that, and in particular i couldn't test it, so I'm not inclined to do it). >> >> - if so, should ./config automatically pick the new targets where there is appropriate threading support? > > > I've been musing about a more autoconf-like approach for some time now (but, for the love of all that is fluffy, not using autoconf itself, which sucks) - it seems this is a good reason to go down that path.
Well, I'm not signing up for that, not yet anyways! :) Short-term advice will do. I think I'll just add new targets and ./config logic for picking then. The fact that targets are stable-ish is useful, as it allows building whatever targets one can build (or cross-build) on the host. autoconf can't do this, and that's one more reason not to autoconf. > Interesting question is: what to do if no appropriate locking mechanism is discovered? I think for a linux-elf-pthread target the dependency on pthreads should be hard. The old linux-elf target should remain thread-unsafe (I can't make OpenSSL fully thread-safe without a thread library). But I could have a target that has a weak dependency on pthreads and is safe when the library is present. Ditto Windows (be unsafe pre-vista/2008, safe in vista/2008 and later, using same OpenSSL DLLs builds). I'd rather add this variation later, after the meat of this work is done, assuming such a variation is desired. Nico --
