On Fri, May 07, 1999, Niels Poppe wrote:
> I think it is a Good Thing for openssl to install by default in a
> dedicated directory.
Sounds reasonable. Ok.
> As it is with religions, there is no benefit from trying to enforce
> one or another.
I don't want to enforce anything. The question is j
niels> As it is with religions, there is no benefit from trying to enforce
niels> one or another. Having the choice is the real religious item to me.
niels> It would be nice if no source patches were needed to get that far :)
I don't think that giving end users/administrators the ability to
choos
Ulf Möller wrote:
>
> >ulf> Should we keep /usr/local/ssl as the default installation path?
> >ulf> Or better use $prefix=/usr/local and put the certs and config
> >ulf> into $prefix/openssl or something like that?
> >
> >Hmm... I guess that's a religious question.
>
> My vote for the default i
Holger.Reif> That looks really ugly! Then I would prefer
Holger.Reif> $stuff_prefix/etc/openssl with $stuff_prefix beeing
Holger.Reif> empty as default.
Holger.Reif>
Holger.Reif> But that's religious too, isn't it? ;-)
Yup, and my religion says that $stuff_prefix should be the same as
$prefix
Ulf Möller schrieb:
>
> >ulf> Should we keep /usr/local/ssl as the default installation path?
> >ulf> Or better use $prefix=/usr/local and put the certs and config
> >ulf> into $prefix/openssl or something like that?
> >
> >Hmm... I guess that's a religious question.
>
> My vote for the default
>ulf> Should we keep /usr/local/ssl as the default installation path?
>ulf> Or better use $prefix=/usr/local and put the certs and config
>ulf> into $prefix/openssl or something like that?
>
>Hmm... I guess that's a religious question.
My vote for the default is $prefix=/usr/local and use $prefi
