[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       openssl-users
Subject:    Re: Building the libraries with Borland Builder.
From:       Katie Lucas <katie () fysh ! org>
Date:       2005-09-30 8:22:53
Message-ID: 20050930082253.GB32102 () fysh ! org
[Download RAW message or body]

On Thu, Sep 29, 2005 at 07:32:53PM +0200, Andy Polyakov wrote:
> >I'm a long time UNIX developer desperately trying to get OpenSSL to
> >work on Windows with Borland Builder 6. I can't change compiler. The
> >rest of the project needs builder, so switching to VC++ is out of the
> >question.
> 
> Keep in mind that some OpenSSL targets are 100% community supported and 
> support for Borland compiler is one of them. This means that 
> target-specific fixes, such as scripts, are not actually tested by 
> OpenSSL team members, but applied in good faith based purely on 
> contributor's feedback. This is essentially why I won't try to answer 
> questions like "why bcb.mak won't work" or "is this normal for Windows."

Freakily, we've tried this out on other machines. On my dev machine
here, the perl scripts consistently make bad makefiles. On my other
half's dev machine at home, he gets valid makefiles from the same
script. Blerg. The difference is that he uses ActivePerl, whereas I've
also got Cygwin Perl installed and I'm wondering if some if the
process is using that perl. I can't believe that versions of perl will
execute scripts that differently, but possibly so.

So todays job is to see if I can build it using this new makefile..


When we get some spare time I'll have a look at why the Cygwin Perl
one doesn't do the right thing -- my bets are on some sort of file
pattern matching working differently because it's trying to fake a
UNIX response. (If we can get the lib working for the project I can
probably talk the boss into letting me spend time returning some
work).
 
> Earlier you mentioned that your application works fine on Linux. Does 
> this code works there? I'm not acquainted with OpenSSL code I think you 
> refer to, but if BIO_new_fd from bss_fd.c is the one you refer to, then 
> it should crash on all platforms... Indeed, BIO_new_fd receives integer 
> fd, then passes it down to fd_ctrl, BIO_C_SET_FD, which essentially does 
> *((int *)fd). In other words you again apparently is hit by another 
> bug... A.

The code works 100% swimmingly on Linux. Believe me, if I was working
on Linux I'd be a happy bunny. I'm frankly shocked by the state of
Windows development. No "strace", bizarre linking wierdnesses.. brr!


______________________________________________________________________
OpenSSL Project                                 http://www.openssl.org
User Support Mailing List                    openssl-users@openssl.org
Automated List Manager                           majordomo@openssl.org
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]