Hi, I've got a question to the Cygwin / Mingw community, regarding the naming of dynamic engines.
>From looking at Makefile.shared et al, the engines get the same kind of prefixes as a standard shared library (but without the accompanying import library, of course). So the capi engine gets named like this: Cygwin: cygcapi.dll Mingw: capieay32.dll Does that mean that using engines with the openssl commands looks strangely different depending on the platform you happen to be on? Like, would a run of openssl s_server with the capi engine like something like this? Cygwin: openssl s_server -engine cygcapi.dll ... Mingw: openssl s_server -engine capieay32.dll ... Unix: openssl s_server -engine capi ... (note that on Unix, it's assumed that the engine *may* be prefixed with "lib", which might be a reason for discussion as well, as it's not really meant to be used as a shared library) Apart from the fact that the current ENGINE framework has no support for the ".dll" suffix internally (that's an easy fix), is there any reason to name the dynamic engines anything but, in this example, capi.dll or libcapi.dll? This is assuming, btw, that no one mixes the different Windows POSIX layers on top of each other. If such mixes are commonplace, it's worth considering, of course... Cheers, Richard -- Richard Levitte levi...@openssl.org OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org/~levitte/ -- openssl-dev mailing list To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-dev
