Date: Thu, 1 Aug 2002 18:30:20 -0400 From: Mikhail Teterin <mi+mx@aldan.algebra.com> To: Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com>, "Jacques A. Vidrine" <nectar@FreeBSD.ORG> Cc: Alexandr Kovalenko <never@nevermind.kiev.ua>, arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: OpenSSL vs. -lmd Message-ID: <200208011830.20096.mi%2Bmx@aldan.algebra.com> In-Reply-To: <3D49B2E9.A2D7C343@mindspring.com> References: <200207311641.g6VGfRWj099655@freefall.freebsd.org> <20020801212917.GA27792@madman.nectar.cc> <3D49B2E9.A2D7C343@mindspring.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thursday 01 August 2002 06:15 pm, Terry Lambert wrote: = I would call the contortions that Mozilla goes through to get an = alternate OpenSSL "Heroic measures". Those measures are also the stupid ones. There is no need for them. = Asking every software vendor out there to perform the same contortions = so that their applications aren't FreeBSD-specific after they're = written is unacceptable. Nobody is planning to ask them. If your application only compiles with a particular version of OpenSSL means the app is broken. In any case, to bring this thread back to the SUBJECT, having -lmd does not help those poor vendors a bit. I'd suggest using -lmd _inside_ -lcrypto, if OpenSSL's implementations of the digests weren't faster... Since they are, -lmd should be dropped. Whatever your opinion on the rest of OpenSSL, its API(s) did not change in a while... Especially in the Message Digest area. -mi To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200208011830.20096.mi%2Bmx>