Thanks Andy!
Michael
On 8/11/05, Andy Polyakov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > 5. I still needed to change the MLFLAGS and LFLAGS in cedll.mak and
> > ce.mak from machine:ARM to machine:thumb. Otherwise, the compiler
> > compains about an incompatibility with winsock.lib (winsock.dll),
> > which
5. I still needed to change the MLFLAGS and LFLAGS in cedll.mak and
ce.mak from machine:ARM to machine:thumb. Otherwise, the compiler
compains about an incompatibility with winsock.lib (winsock.dll),
which was linked with machine:thumb.
http://cvs.openssl.org/chngview?cn=14356. a.
_
defined as the
lowest-common-denominator -- perhaps the TI OMAP chips used in some of the
Smartphones are only ARMV4.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Michael Wang
Sent: Thursday, 11 August 2005 10:08 AM
To: openssl-users@openssl.org
Subject:
OK, I downloaded wcecompat 1.1 and openssl-0.9.8-stable-SNAP-20050810
and rebuilt everything again. Things are much, much better now. Of
the items below, I think only #2 and #5 suggest a fix is needed in
wcecompat and openssl. The others itmes are responses to previous
emails.
1. I fixed my %IN
On 8/9/05, Steven Reddie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I wrote wcecompat solely for the OpenSSL port (but with a view to using it
> for other things), so I guess you could say I'm more of an OpenSSL-er than a
> Windows CE-er.
>
> Do you know if a similar change needs to be made for ARMV4T?
>
Sorr
-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Michael Wang
Sent: Wednesday, 10 August 2005 3:15 AM
To: openssl-users@openssl.org
Subject: Re: openssl-0.9.8-stable-SNAP-20050805 on WinCE5.0
Oh Hi Steven,
I am pleasently surprised to see that you are monitoring the list.
Than
Sent: Wednesday, 10 August 2005 8:35 AM
To: openssl-users@openssl.org
Subject: Re: openssl-0.9.8-stable-SNAP-20050805 on WinCE5.0
>> 3. In bf_skey, memcpy was undefined,
>
> Will look into it...
Looked into it and it didn't make any sense. Required header file is
included so it
ew location as there
are bound to be registry settings (perhaps for the emulator) that point to
the wrong location.
Steven
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Michael Wang
Sent: Wednesday, 10 August 2005 4:51 AM
To: openssl-users@openssl.org
Su
Hi Andy,
The first release wasn't numbered. This new release is numbered 1.1.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Andy Polyakov
Sent: Wednesday, 10 August 2005 3:29 AM
To: openssl-users@openssl.org
Subject: Re: openssl-0.9.8-stable
3. In bf_skey, memcpy was undefined,
Will look into it...
Looked into it and it didn't make any sense. Required header file is
included so it shouldn't be a problem... Strangely enough there're a
number of files calling memcpy, which are compiled prior bf_skey.c, so
how come it gets "angry"
On 8/9/05, Andy Polyakov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> What were your %INCLUDE% and %LIB% upon nmake time?
C:\tmp\newwcecompat\wcecompat>set
CC=clarm.exe
CFG=none
include=C:\Windows CE Tools\WCE420\POCKET PC 2003\include\ARMV4I;C:\Windows CE T
ools\WCE420\POCKET PC 2003\MFC\include;C:\Windows CE T
Steven,
I've put a new wcecompat.zip up at essemer.com.au which includes ENOMEM and
EAGAIN. The remainder of the problems need to be corrected in OpenSSL.
Do you number wcecompat releases? I mean I'd like to mention some
reference point in INSTALL.WCE, e.g. "at least version x.y" or
"downlo
I downloaded openssl-0.9.8-stable-SNAP-20050805 and compiled it for my
Windows CE platform and had a few problems.
Sometimes "test latest snapshot" *really* means "*latest*":-)
1. In the CFLAGS define, the compiler didn't like the /wd4959. It
said it was unrecognized and refused to go further
Behalf Of Michael Wang
> Sent: Tuesday, 9 August 2005 5:01 AM
> To: openssl-users@openssl.org
> Subject: openssl-0.9.8-stable-SNAP-20050805 on WinCE5.0
>
> Hi,
>
> I downloaded openssl-0.9.8-stable-SNAP-20050805 and compiled it for my
> Windows CE platform and had a few problems.
esday, 9 August 2005 5:01 AM
To: openssl-users@openssl.org
Subject: openssl-0.9.8-stable-SNAP-20050805 on WinCE5.0
Hi,
I downloaded openssl-0.9.8-stable-SNAP-20050805 and compiled it for my
Windows CE platform and had a few problems. In general though, the code
(for WinCE) has been much improved
Hi,
I downloaded openssl-0.9.8-stable-SNAP-20050805 and compiled it for my
Windows CE platform and had a few problems. In general though, the
code (for WinCE) has been much improved over the 0.9.8 release; good
job openlssl developers!
Here are a couple of issues I had.
1. In the CFLAGS define,
16 matches
Mail list logo
