Ulf Lamping wrote: >>It wouldn't be this one by any chance? Quoting myself from December 05 >><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> >>In openssl.h I had to change the typedef for X509_NAME and all the >>places it is used to something else because of some error I suspect (but >>couldn't prove) is a name clash. X509_NAME_SCREWS_UP_MSVC8 seems to be >>acceptable to the compiler. > > > Yes, exactly. But I don't tend to change the library sources (with the need > to tweaking it each time a new gnutls version comes along) - we might need to > talk to the gnutls developers for a new release with a fix for this. > > In the meantime, I can live with gnutls simply disabled in config.nmake for > now - as it's just optional. > > >>But as I said then, the binaries would not run. >> > > > Generating with the patches from Laurent (already checked in) my binaries are > just running fine. There's need for me for some minor tweaking left (e.g. > test correct unicode handling, installer, ...), but the general process is > just working ok. ;-))) > > However, I've only tested it on MS Visual C++ 2005 Express Edition with > latest Platform SDK - I will test it on the 2005 Studio later.
http://groups.google.com/group/mailing.openssl.users/browse_thread/thread/72c89ea76c253905/76f8cbdc64a6efd6?lnk=st&q=MSVC+%22X509_NAME%22&rnum=1#76f8cbdc64a6efd6 and http://groups.google.com/group/mailing.openssl.users/browse_thread/thread/e01d1192f0ff788e/985b19d72f4829bc?lnk=st&q=MSVC+%22X509_NAME%22&rnum=2#985b19d72f4829bc both refer to this X509_NAME issue. Adding /DNOCRYPT to GNUTLS_CFLAGS in config.nmake seems to work with MSVC2005 -- There's no point in being grown up if you can't be childish sometimes. -- Dr. Who _______________________________________________ Wireshark-dev mailing list [email protected] http://www.wireshark.org/mailman/listinfo/wireshark-dev
