[openssl.org #186] [PATCH] Makefile.org GNU ld detection

2002-11-14 Thread Richard Levitte via RT 

I can't recall having gotten a response.  However, since this has 
been tested by a bunch of others, I'll resolve this ticket.

[levitte - Fri Oct 11 00:01:54 2002]:

 The question was, in what way does your patch make things better?
 Since there was no answer for quite a while, I assumed the question
 wouldn't be answered, and decided to resolve the ticket.  Wrongly,
 it now seems, so I'll reopen it and let you answer the question.
 
 [levitte - Thu Oct 10 23:42:36 2002]:
 
  [[EMAIL PROTECTED] - Thu Oct 10 23:29:14 2002]:
 
   a question which was  never CC'd to me. Also I'm not  sure what
 is
  the
   meaning of these two entries:
  
   Tue Aug 13 17:52:03 2002
   jaenicke - Milestone 0.9.6h added
  
   Tue Aug 13 17:52:13 2002
   jaenicke - Subsystem Build added
 
  Oh, they're just keywords (kind of attributes) that were added to
  the entry.  We use that to classify the reports we get.
 


-- 
Richard Levitte
__
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
Development Mailing List   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Automated List Manager   [EMAIL PROTECTED]

[openssl.org #186] [PATCH] Makefile.org GNU ld detection

2002-10-10 Thread Richard Levitte via RT 


[[EMAIL PROTECTED] - Thu Oct 10 23:29:14 2002]:

 a question which was  never CC'd to me. Also I'm not  sure what is 
the
 meaning of these two entries:
 
 Tue Aug 13 17:52:03 2002 
 jaenicke - Milestone 0.9.6h added 

 Tue Aug 13 17:52:13 2002 
 jaenicke - Subsystem Build added 

Oh, they're just keywords (kind of attributes) that were added to 
the entry.  We use that to classify the reports we get.

-- 
Richard Levitte
__
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
Development Mailing List   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Automated List Manager   [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [openssl.org #186] [PATCH] Makefile.org GNU ld detection

2002-10-10 Thread Chris Majewski via RT 


So, did the patch get put in, or was it useless? 

-chris

Richard Levitte via RT [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

 [[EMAIL PROTECTED] - Thu Oct 10 23:29:14 2002]:
 
  a question which was  never CC'd to me. Also I'm not  sure what is 
 the
  meaning of these two entries:
  
  Tue Aug 13 17:52:03 2002 
  jaenicke - Milestone 0.9.6h added 
 
  Tue Aug 13 17:52:13 2002 
  jaenicke - Subsystem Build added 
 
 Oh, they're just keywords (kind of attributes) that were added to 
 the entry.  We use that to classify the reports we get.
 
 -- 
 Richard Levitte

__
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
Development Mailing List   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Automated List Manager   [EMAIL PROTECTED]

[openssl.org #186] [PATCH] Makefile.org GNU ld detection

2002-10-10 Thread Richard Levitte via RT 


The question was, in what way does your patch make things better?  
Since there was no answer for quite a while, I assumed the question 
wouldn't be answered, and decided to resolve the ticket.  Wrongly, 
it now seems, so I'll reopen it and let you answer the question.

[levitte - Thu Oct 10 23:42:36 2002]:

 [[EMAIL PROTECTED] - Thu Oct 10 23:29:14 2002]:
 
  a question which was  never CC'd to me. Also I'm not  sure what 
is 
 the
  meaning of these two entries:
  
  Tue Aug 13 17:52:03 2002 
  jaenicke - Milestone 0.9.6h added 
 
  Tue Aug 13 17:52:13 2002 
  jaenicke - Subsystem Build added 
 
 Oh, they're just keywords (kind of attributes) that were added to 
 the entry.  We use that to classify the reports we get.


-- 
Richard Levitte
__
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
Development Mailing List   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Automated List Manager   [EMAIL PROTECTED]

[openssl.org #186] [PATCH] Makefile.org GNU ld detection

2002-08-17 Thread Richard Levitte via RT 


I'm sorry, I fail to see why your change makes it better.  Care to 
explain?

[[EMAIL PROTECTED] - Thu Aug  1 09:14:21 2002]:

 Here's a patch that fixes  the DETECT_GNU_LD code in Makefile.org 
when
 building on a  Sun box with GCC 2.95.2 and  higher.  Yes the 
timestamp
 is   a  few   months   old,   but  the   patch   applies  cleanly  
 to
 openssl-0.9.6e/Makefile.org  Please let me  know if  this is  not 
your
 preferred format for receiving patches.
 
 -chris
 
 *** Makefile.org.orig Wed Mar 20 13:37:25 2002
 --- Makefile.org  Wed Mar 20 13:42:38 2002
 ***
 *** 263,267 
   done
 
 ! DETECT_GNU_LD=${CC} -v 21 | grep '^gcc' /dev/null 21  \
   collect2=`gcc -print-prog-name=collect2 21`  \
   [ -n $$collect2 ]  \
 --- 263,267 
   done
 
 ! DETECT_GNU_LD=`${CC} -print-prog-name=ld` --version 21 | grep
 '^GNU' /dev/null 21  \
   collect2=`gcc -print-prog-name=collect2 21`  \
   [ -n $$collect2 ]  \
 
__
 OpenSSL Project 
http://www.openssl.org
 Development Mailing List   
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Automated List Manager   
[EMAIL PROTECTED]


-- 
Richard Levitte
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
__
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
Development Mailing List   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Automated List Manager   [EMAIL PROTECTED]

[openssl.org #186] [PATCH] Makefile.org GNU ld detection

2002-08-01 Thread Chris Majewski via RT 


Here's a patch that fixes  the DETECT_GNU_LD code in Makefile.org when
building on a  Sun box with GCC 2.95.2 and  higher.  Yes the timestamp
is   a  few   months   old,   but  the   patch   applies  cleanly   to
openssl-0.9.6e/Makefile.org  Please let me  know if  this is  not your
preferred format for receiving patches. 

-chris

*** Makefile.org.orig   Wed Mar 20 13:37:25 2002
--- Makefile.orgWed Mar 20 13:42:38 2002
***
*** 263,267 
done
  
! DETECT_GNU_LD=${CC} -v 21 | grep '^gcc' /dev/null 21  \
collect2=`gcc -print-prog-name=collect2 21`  \
[ -n $$collect2 ]  \
--- 263,267 
done
  
! DETECT_GNU_LD=`${CC} -print-prog-name=ld` --version 21 | grep '^GNU' /dev/null 
21  \
collect2=`gcc -print-prog-name=collect2 21`  \
[ -n $$collect2 ]  \
__
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
Development Mailing List   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Automated List Manager   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
__
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
Development Mailing List   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Automated List Manager   [EMAIL PROTECTED]