On 2/6/08, Peter Stuge [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Feb 05, 2008 at 10:00:48PM +0200, Alon Bar-Lev wrote:
well, itis more about which libraries the dll depends on. don't
know too much about mingw, and if they are 99.9% compatible or
100%.
100%
Yep. MinGW is a full win32 gcc, so
On 2/4/08, Alon Bar-Lev [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello,
If you are Windows OpenSC user, I need your help!
I've modified the OpenSC build to use alternative compiler for
Windows. I need acknowledgment that it works the same as always.
I will be gratefull to receive some feedback!
Hello
Alon Bar-Lev wrote:
On 2/4/08, Alon Bar-Lev [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello,
If you are Windows OpenSC user, I need your help!
I've modified the OpenSC build to use alternative compiler for
Windows. I need acknowledgment that it works the same as always.
I will be gratefull to receive
On 2/4/08, Andreas Jellinghaus [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
most important for me would be: can the resultung binary be used with CSPs?
The result binary is a standard PKCS#11... So it should work... :)
BTW: Why didn't you enabled the selection of the PKCS#11 library of
the CSP11 to be configurable
On Feb 5, 2008 9:02 PM, Andreas Jellinghaus [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Am Dienstag, 5. Februar 2008 13:43:58 schrieb Alon Bar-Lev:
On 2/4/08, Andreas Jellinghaus [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
most important for me would be: can the resultung binary be used with
CSPs?
The result binary is a
Am Freitag, 1. Februar 2008 22:29:49 schrieb Alon Bar-Lev:
Major Changes:
1. Cleanup current build system, (Andreas, I hope you will not be
completely mad). All optional components are disabled now by default,
use --enable-X to enable them if required.
2. Make build system support mingw.
3.
On 2/3/08, Ludovic Rousseau [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
When I think about it now, a system_xyz.c file (much like pcsc-lite)
with direct wrappers for win32 api would be a better choice than
'require libtool on windows'.
That would be a reimplementation of libltdl, wouldn't be?
I do not use
OK, builds perfect on StartCom MultiMedia 5 and StartCom Enterprise 5
(RHEL). On ML5 all options are enabled:
Host:i686-pc-linux-gnu
Compiler:gcc
Compiler flags: -fno-strict-aliasing -g -O2
Preprocessor flags:
Linker flags:
Libraries:
zlib support:
Actually I didn't knew that there is such a flag now...of course there
is readline, will try it with it next time ;-)
Alon Bar-Lev wrote:
Thanks!
Do you actually don't have readline? Or is it an error?
Alon.
On 2/3/08, Eddy Nigg (StartCom Ltd.) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
OK, builds
On 2/3/08, Eddy Nigg (StartCom Ltd.) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Actually I didn't knew that there is such a flag now...of course there is
readline, will try it with it next time ;-)
It should had been autodetected...
Next time, please send me the config.log too, so I know what is wrong.
Alon.
On 2/2/08, Martin Paljak [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
When I think about it now, a system_xyz.c file (much like pcsc-lite)
with direct wrappers for win32 api would be a better choice than
'require libtool on windows'.
I think so too...
Thanks!
___
On 2/2/08, Martin Paljak [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm not sure that OpenSC and the primary interface (PKCS#11) is
actually executed with system privileges
unless you use it in tandem of some system-privileges software (like
CSP11 for example)
CSP also is loaded into the context of an
On 2/2/08, Martin Paljak [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Feb 2, 2008, at 12:11 AM, Alon Bar-Lev wrote:
Using Manifests requires to be more dependent on Microsoft
technologies. Also it has nothing to do with security. A simpler
solution would be to create a new DLL name for each release.
On Feb 2, 2008, at 12:18 PM, Alon Bar-Lev wrote:
On 2/2/08, Martin Paljak [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Feb 2, 2008, at 12:26 AM, Alon Bar-Lev wrote:
Yes. I don't want to do this on compile time, but on Runtime, there
must be
some way to get version or some other feedback to distinguished
On 2/2/08, Martin Paljak [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Feb 2, 2008, at 12:18 PM, Alon Bar-Lev wrote:
On 2/2/08, Martin Paljak [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Feb 2, 2008, at 12:26 AM, Alon Bar-Lev wrote:
Yes. I don't want to do this on compile time, but on Runtime, there
must be
some way
Alon Bar-Lev wrote:
I still don't understand why building a working release using MinGW is
a bad idea...
I hope other people can assists in their view.
Generally I support your view, but being also a pragmatist most of the
times, I go with what works best too. Apparently /many/some/ of us
On 2/2/08, Eddy Nigg (StartCom Ltd.) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Now I get why I don't receive your mails correctly.. You are using HTML mail...
Thanks for the info.
(BTW, Sun, AIX and others do have the gcc compiler so I don't see a problem
here, except that one can build it on Linux)
MinGW
On 2/2/08, Eddy Nigg (StartCom Ltd.) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
However if there are enough builders and developers for the MS platform and
it works better with MS compiler etc. then why not? But if nobody maintains
the code within reasonable time, I prefer to rely on MinGW or other OSS
tools.
Alon Bar-Lev wrote:
On 2/2/08, Eddy Nigg (StartCom Ltd.) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Now I get why I don't receive your mails correctly.. You are using HTML mail...
Well, yes, TB has that feature ;-)
...what's wrong with that?
(BTW, Sun, AIX and others do have the gcc compiler so I don't see
On 2/1/08, Alon Bar-Lev [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
5. No version and other resources for DLLs and EXEs, it may be added
in future if important.
Finished with this one.
The only noticeable change is the lack of manifests as mingw does not
support these.
Alon.
On 2/2/08, Alon Bar-Lev [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The only active system I know where pcsc-lite has less arguments is on
Mac OS X Tiger currently. On Linux I believe most up to date
distributions ship with a newer pcsc-lite. There are some but very-
very seldom e-mails to lists or personal
On 2/1/08, Alon Bar-Lev [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Windows binaries are available at [1], source tarball is available at [2].
As far as I know this should work. I need people to test this.
Updated binaries and source are available for testing, include totally
dynamic pcsc support, and resource
Testing the proposed opensc from
http://alon.barlev.googlepages.com/opensc-0.11.4-svn.tar.gz
Configure works on ML-5 (StartCom MultiMedia) with ./configure
--enable-openct --enable-pcsc-lite --enable-nsplugin, however PCSC isn't
picked up:
OpenSSL support: yes
PC/SC support:
On 2/3/08, Eddy Nigg (StartCom Ltd.) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Testing the proposed opensc from
http://alon.barlev.googlepages.com/opensc-0.11.4-svn.tar.gz
Configure works on ML-5 (StartCom MultiMedia) with ./configure
--enable-openct --enable-pcsc-lite --enable-nsplugin, however PCSC isn't
Hello All,
It all started as result of OpenSSL incompatibility between an
application and OpenSC PKCS#11 provider.
I quickly learned that OpenSC is built for Windows only using
Microsoft compiler.
Requiring Microsoft compile for free software is somewhat strange... :)
Also, it required OpenSC
On 2/1/08, Eddy Nigg (StartCom Ltd.) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hey Alon, this sounds like a good deal! So I'm afraid I can't help with
Winedoze and can't voice an opinion on that part...I didn't even knew that
it requires MS compilers ;-)
Thanks!
You can check if the new tarball compiles and
On 2/1/08, Alon Bar-Lev [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It took some effort, but at the end I have a test release that uses a
single autoconf/automake/libtool build system for all operating
systems.
Forgot to describe how to build for Windows...
I build using cross compile on Linux to mingw32
On 2/2/08, Douglas E. Engert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Why? Using the vendor's compiler is common on many platforms,
especially if your code is in the kernel, or is security
related, like OpenSC and runs with operating system privileges.
I disagree completely, and believe the other way around.
Alon Bar-Lev wrote:
Hello All,
It all started as result of OpenSSL incompatibility between an
application and OpenSC PKCS#11 provider.
I quickly learned that OpenSC is built for Windows only using
Microsoft compiler.
Requiring Microsoft compile for free software is somewhat
On Feb 2, 2008, at 12:26 AM, Alon Bar-Lev wrote:
2. Download latest libtool for win32 [3].
[[[Does someone know why is this used for Windows, I believe a simple
LoadLibrary(), GetProcAddress() should do.]]]
There used to be scdl
Hi!
On Feb 2, 2008, at 12:06 AM, Douglas E. Engert wrote:
Alon Bar-Lev wrote:
Requiring Microsoft compile for free software is somewhat
strange... :)
Why? Using the vendor's compiler is common on many platforms,
especially if your code is in the kernel, or is security
related, like OpenSC
Hi.
On Feb 2, 2008, at 12:26 AM, Alon Bar-Lev wrote:
Ludovic, I need some help in reader-pcsc:
1. How can I detect if SCardControl is old or new? I am sure I can do
this by detecting some other fact.
Do you mean the number of parameters passed to SCardControl? I believe
you just have to
On Feb 2, 2008, at 12:11 AM, Alon Bar-Lev wrote:
Using Manifests requires to be more dependent on Microsoft
technologies. Also it has nothing to do with security. A simpler
solution would be to create a new DLL name for each release.
Windows is Windows is owned by Microsoft and this is a sad
33 matches
Mail list logo
