Date: Mon, 01 Mar 2004 09:13:10 +0300 From: Michael Tokarev <mjt@....msk.ru> To: xvendor@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: OpenSSL soname Solar Designer wrote: ... [2 openssl soname naming schemes - libssl.so.N vs libssl.so.X.Y.Z] > It doesn't appear that we can be binary-compatible with application > software packages built for both Red Hat Linux and official OpenSSL. > So we have to choose one of those (either make it *.4 or *.0.9.7). The above does not seems to be true. That is, it is very simple to support both schemes, by providing both RH-style libssl.so.N and openssl-style libssl.so.X.Y.Z libraries, where libssl.so.N is a symlink to libssl.so.X.Y.Z, since both are really the same (not just "compatbile", but exactly the same). This looks a bit messy, and may break if openssl folks descides to use redhat-style naming scheme after 1.0 release (as their libssl.so.1 will definitely NOT be compatible with redhat libssl.so.1 which correspond to 0.9.6. Either way, the question remains open - someone (either redhat or the rest of the world ;) should change naming scheme at some point. /mjt
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Please check out the xvendor mailing list charter.