On Sun January 1 2012, grarpamp wrote: > > Translation: I have to agree with O.P. - It looks broke to me too. ;-) > > Heh, that's precisely what I said in my report :) The front end > options to do it seem to exist, and they even have some brief > descriptions as such. They just don't work :) > > 'zlib' should get us static inclusion. >
There is an inconsistency in the output of ./config --help, the documentation, and what is written in the config/make code. The true meaning (as executed) is: zlib / no-zlib (no-zlib is the default) controls the presence of compression (except for a source file or two that isn't properly conditioned to match that). IF compressed streams are enabled, then: no-zlib-dynamic (the default) should get you the compression statically included. > 'zlib-dynamic' should get us dynamic inclusion. > And that should get you a reference to the specified dynamic library. But the build system is always referring to the system installed libraries. Which is why I showed in my example the use of a library other than the system installed one. The real key here is to ignore the "--help" and the documentation and read the top Makefile __before__ running the config step(s). > And then there's the failure of zlib to actually compress the data > before encryption, also in my report. (gmail stupidly wrapped the > command lines on that, sorry.) > I was able to get the compression test to fail/pass depending on how I (mis-)configured/built the package. But I didn't check if compression is used outside of "make test". ;-) > I'll play around with the build system. And file a bug. Hopefully > something will follow. > > Ps: The -D options are not needed since the --with versions of them > work fine. Again, as in my report. > I didn't check the --with versions, only found that the -D options are being ignored although passed with the commands., maybe the --with versions do work. Which doesn't mean that the -D options are not also broke. ;-) Also, gcc option parsing is becoming more strict. At the moment (v4.6) it only warns that link options are being passed when no linking is being done. I just am not comfortable enough with that perlized makefile build system to even guess at where that needs to be fixed before a newer gcc version turns that warning into a failure. Mike > ______________________________________________________________________ > OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org > User Support Mailing List openssl-users@openssl.org > Automated List Manager majord...@openssl.org > > ______________________________________________________________________ OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org User Support Mailing List openssl-users@openssl.org Automated List Manager majord...@openssl.org
