On Sat, 16 Oct 2004, Soeren Nils Kuklau wrote: > > sha1sum.exe? > > Calling an external tool for generating password hashes seems awkward. > We do have openssl-devel installed, and the `sha.h' header file looks > identical to the one we're used to (from OS X), so we're unsure why this > bug is occurring. Since I haven't found any info on this on the 'net, > I'll have to assume the mistake is somewhere in our code :-)
Try linking it with -lcrypto? ;-) I'm surprised it works on OS/X, though. > Before we've fixed that, however, we can obviously not release a Windows > (Cygwin) binary. > > As to the comments about this thread being on the wrong mailing list: > > 1) I don't want to be a bother - if a list moderator wants this > discussion to stop, I'll stop, and I hereby apologize for any trouble > I've apparently caused. This is the right mailing list for discussing, say, problems building something on Cygwin (if you think it's Cygwin's fault or some idiosyncracy of Cygwin). This is *not* the right list for discussing how to subvert the existing Cygwin installations on users' machines by distributing your own copy of cygwin1.dll (though this *has* been discussed in the past - search the list archives). If you're careful, you might even pull it off. > 2) I personally believe that Cygwin is primarily an environment, and not > a distribution. Cygwin is an emulation layer. The Cygwin distribution contains a set of packages that use this emulation layer. > We do use Cygwin to build our project, because Cygwin feels less "alien" > from our point of view. That's one of the goals of Cygwin - to make porting Unix applications to Windows easier. > At the same time, however, we do not want Windows-based users to feel > forced into Cygwin's behaviours. We want to distribute a Windows > application - GPL'd, with some Unix-style quirks, and compatible to the > other major OS'es out there, but Windows nevertheless. So maybe the MinGW project is more like what you're looking for, then. > Those who truly want a full Unix experience wouldn't use Windows in the > first place, and thus not Cygwin either. This is not true at all (to put it mildly). Those who want POSIX behavior on Windows *will* (and *do*) use Cygwin. But this particular point is better <http://cygwin.com/acronyms/#TITTTL>ed. Igor -- http://cs.nyu.edu/~pechtcha/ |\ _,,,---,,_ [EMAIL PROTECTED] ZZZzz /,`.-'`' -. ;-;;,_ [EMAIL PROTECTED] |,4- ) )-,_. ,\ ( `'-' Igor Pechtchanski, Ph.D. '---''(_/--' `-'\_) fL a.k.a JaguaR-R-R-r-r-r-.-.-. Meow! "Happiness lies in being privileged to work hard for long hours in doing whatever you think is worth doing." -- Dr. Jubal Harshaw -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
