Subject: Re: CVS commit: src/crypto/dist/openssl
To: None <email@example.com>
From: Perry E. Metzger <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 07/15/2003 08:13:19
> >> > Log Message:
> >> > unifdef VMS/WIN16/WIN32 in public headers, at least
> >> >is this actually necessary? "dist" sources should not be changed
> >> >to be less portable for no reason... the only real change i can
> >> >see this makes is making it harder for future openssl updates due
> >> >to unnecessary conflicts....
> >> header files shouldn't have #ifdef which easily conflict with what user
> >> would define by chance. there's no portability issue, we won't and
> >> shouldn't use the removed prototypes (and whatever) anyways.
> >I agree with Matt that the dist headers should remain the
> >same. However, you are right that /usr/include header files should be
> >clean. Perhaps unifdef could be called on the untouched files at build
> >time, so that clean files are installed even though the originals
> >remain untouched?
> i fear possible inconsistencies while building libcrypto (with all
> #ifdef VMS intact) and installing include files (with all #ifdef VMS
> removed) with the above approach.
If you first turn a source file into a destination file and include
the destination file during build, all should be well.
Perry E. Metzger email@example.com