In message <20160215122509.ga15...@calimero.vinschen.de> on Mon, 15 Feb 2016 13:25:09 +0100, Corinna Vinschen <vinsc...@redhat.com> said:
vinschen> On Feb 15 13:03, Richard Levitte wrote: vinschen> > So here is what I'm thinking... vinschen> > vinschen> > - engines in 1.1 should be named FOO.{suffix} (for an engine FOO and vinschen> > whatever suffix is conventional on the platform at hand, be it .so, vinschen> > .dll, .sl, .dylib...) vinschen> > - the OpenSSL DSO module should be changed to have the DSO suffix vinschen> > configured instead of having it hardcoded as it is right now (the vinschen> > template framework we use makes that real easy, see how vinschen> > crypto/include/internal/bn_conf.h is generated as an example). vinschen> > - the OpenSSL ENGINE module should be changed to tell the DSO module vinschen> > not to prefix the received file name with "lib" (which I suspect is vinschen> > the primary reason for the install hack you mentioned above). vinschen> > vinschen> > That way, we would have engines that look like DSOs and not like vinschen> > shared libraries. On cygwin, that would be something like "capi.dll", vinschen> > on MacOS it would be "capi.dylib", on most other Unixen it would be vinschen> > "capi.so". My intention is to have this work smoothly and vinschen> > consistently, without having to resort to all kinds of weird install vinschen> > hacks or whatnot. vinschen> > vinschen> > Does that sounds like an acceptable change to you? vinschen> vinschen> Any method being platform independent because implementation details are vinschen> hidden under the hood sounds perfect to me. Then it's a go, I'll work on that. Thanks for your feedback! -- 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