Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2005 00:07:29 EST-10EDT,10,-1,0,7200,3,-1,0,7200,3600 Subject: [Ux2bs_Archive] No. 385 ************************************************** Sunday 09 January 2005 Number 385 ************************************************** Subjects for today 1 Re: [UX2BS] OPENSSL : Stefan.Neis at t-online.de 2 Re: [UX2BS] OPENSSL : John Poltorak **= Email 1 ==========================** Date: Sat, 8 Jan 2005 14:24:19 +0100 From: Stefan.Neis at t-online.de Subject: Re: [UX2BS] OPENSSL Hi, > I was under the impression that such defines could be done at compile time > by specifying '-Dstrncasecmp=strnicmp -Dstrcasecmp=stricmp' among CFLAGS, > although I have been unable to get this working myself. Well, as a hack, if you don't want to modify source files. But openssl already has suitable defines for OS/2 in it's header files, it just shouldn't override/replace them, so here fixing the source code seems to be the right thing to do. Regards, Stefan _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs **= Email 2 ==========================** Date: Sat, 8 Jan 2005 13:41:37 +0000 From: John Poltorak Subject: Re: [UX2BS] OPENSSL On Sat, Jan 08, 2005 at 02:24:19PM +0100, Stefan.Neis at t-online.de wrote: > Hi, > > > I was under the impression that such defines could be done at compile time > > by specifying '-Dstrncasecmp=strnicmp -Dstrcasecmp=stricmp' among CFLAGS, > > although I have been unable to get this working myself. > > Well, as a hack, if you don't want to modify source files. > But openssl already has suitable defines for OS/2 in it's > header files, it just shouldn't override/replace them, so > here fixing the source code seems to be the right thing to > do. If source code is to be fixed then I guess patches should be submitted to the OpenSSL maintainers. As OS/2 is supposed to be a supported platform I'd expect them to accept such patches. Wonder who got OS/2 support included in the first place... As far as the str[n]casecmp problem goes, I'd like to get round that by using Posix/2 which, I would have thought, should make some OS/2 code redundant. > Regards, > Stefan -- John _______________________________________________ UX2BS mailing list UX2BS at os2ports.com http://os2ports.com/mailman/listinfo/ux2bs