<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000099">
On 15/02/2016 23:16, Richard Levitte wrote:<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:20160216.001656.1322821529737613607.levitte@openssl.org"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">In message <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:20160215.185953.117619649162395329.levitte@openssl.org"><20160215.185953.117619649162395329.levitte@openssl.org></a> on Mon, 15 Feb 2016 18:59:53 +0100 (CET), Richard Levitte <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:levitte@openssl.org"><levitte@openssl.org></a> said:
levitte> In message <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:56C210E7.5080804@oracle.com"><56C210E7.5080804@oracle.com></a> on Mon, 15 Feb 2016 17:54:47 +0000, Jeremy Farrell <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:jeremy.farrell@oracle.com"><jeremy.farrell@oracle.com></a> said:
levitte>
levitte> jeremy.farrell> It sounds good, except shouldn't it be "capi.so" for
levitte> jeremy.farrell> cygwin, like the other mainstream POSIXy
levitte> jeremy.farrell> implementations? The point of cygwin is that it's
levitte> jeremy.farrell> POSIX not Windows, and it generally follows common
levitte> jeremy.farrell> practices of POSIXy OSes for things which aren't
levitte> jeremy.farrell> specified by POSIX. It seems that it would be simpler
levitte> jeremy.farrell> all round (for users as well as development) to treat
levitte> jeremy.farrell> it the same as "normal" UNIX-like OSes except when it
levitte> jeremy.farrell> absolutely has to be treated differently.
levitte>
levitte> In practice, it really doesn't matter, it all comes down what the DSO
levitte> module supports, and the way I'm coding this, Configure will decide.
levitte> So it's a preference and nothing else. Me, I don't particularly care,
levitte> but if it disturbs the Cygwin community to see one .dll too many, I'm
levitte> ready to make the necessary changes (it's literally one line of code
levitte> to change).
I had myself a look around in my little installation, and tried these
two commands:
find /usr/lib -name '*.so'
find /usr/lib -name '*.dll'
The first one didn't even return a screenfull (in my 25 line terminal
screen), and the overwhelming majority was OpenSSL 1.0.2 engines ;-)
The second one, on the other hand, gave a *lot* more output. All
aspell, babl, gawk, gegl, perl(!) loadable modules are named with
the FOO.dll naming convention (there are a few packages, a minority,
that have named them cygFOO.dll)... and the list goes on.
So looking at how things seem to be done normally, I feel confident
that FOO.dll is a sane choice, even though not strictly POSIX in its
file name extension. And like I said, it matters very little for any
user, the goal is to allow this kind of command line:
openssl s_server -engine FOO
No extension, just a name for the user to worry about.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
Thanks Richard - it was just a thought, and clearly not a very
helpful one. The rest of the proposal looks like a good improvement
to me.<br>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
J. J. Farrell - not speaking for Oracle</pre>
</body>
</html>