> It looks like ordinals are changing and/or being removed for functions > exported by the Windows DLL. Its causing pain points for users in the > field, and it appears to be trending. Confer: > > * WAMP OpenSSL ordinal 372 error, http://stackoverflow.com/q/36238887 > * The Ordinal 112 could not be located in dynamic link library…, > http://stackoverflow.com/q/36163468
This can be a bit misleading in sense that it doesn't have to be related to ordinals per se. I mean if an application calls a function from DLL, if you remove that function from DLL, it doesn't matter how it was exposed, by ordinal or by name. If exposed by name, then error message would be more readable, or less ambiguous, but application will fail to start in either case. In other words I agree with Richard's suggestion that someone fails to keep OpenSSL DLLs in check, and say that failure to do so would have similar effect irregardless whether or not we stick with ordinals or not. -- openssl-dev mailing list To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-dev