Hi On 16 January 2011 02:17, Jean-Yves Avenard <jyaven...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi > > On 15 January 2011 23:48, Jilles Tjoelker <jil...@stack.nl> wrote: > >> >> The approach has been used by Debian for some time. >> >> Links: >> http://chris.dzombak.name/blog/2010/03/building-openssl-with-symbol-versioning/ >> http://chris.dzombak.name/files/openssl/openssl-0.9.8l-symbolVersioning.diff >> http://rt.openssl.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=1222&user=guest&pass=guest > > This sounds very interesting. > > I do have trouble understanding on how this would make a difference > with how it's currently working. > > base openssl uses libssl.so.6 and libcrypto.so.6 > > current port openssl is using .so.7 > > So they too have different sonames; How could changing this to > .so.0.9.8 for base and so.1.0.2 for port make things behave > differently?
Replying to myself.. Looking at the symbols in the openssl libraries found on a Ubuntu machine, I see what is going on: symbol name: X509_NAME_cmp@OPENSSL_0.9.8 vs X509_NAME_cmp This sounds like a great approach.. and should definitely resolve my problems I think. Are you sure both base and port needs to be patched? I would have assumed that patching only port would be sufficient (provided all tools depending on it are also recompiled) Jean-Yves _______________________________________________ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
