[openssl-users] Building libcrypto/libssl without symbolic link

Erik Forsberg erik at efca.com
Wed Apr 22 06:31:18 UTC 2015

Not sure what platform the other person is using, but, for the record
the soname 1.0.0 causes big problems on Solaris 11 and up. Solaris 11
ships an OpenSSL 1.0.0 version in standard library locations, if anyone just builds
anything higher than that, and do NOT modify build to add -R runtime
load paths, you will see the libssl built link with Solaris 11 libcrypto which is
not good. There are functions in 1.0.1 that do not exist in 1.0.0

I have seen a change in version naming strategy in main branch, so hopefully
this will soon be not an issue. FYI, changing LD_LIBRARY_PATH using crle, is
a bad idea on Solaris 11, made my boot environment un-bootable.

For Solaris at least, I think its a good idea to modify makefiles to always provide
the -R option to the linker. I have used that for a very long time, and avoided
any collisions with standard Solaris versions.

>-- Original Message --
>On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 12:12:45AM +0000, Shanku Roy wrote:
>> lrw-r--r-- root     root              2015-04-10 02:33 libcrypto.so -> libcrypto.so.1.0.0
>> -rw-r--r-- root     root      1988088 2015-04-10 02:27 libcrypto.so.1.0.0
>> Is there any configure option in OpenSSL build scripts to not generate
>> the symbolic links and rather generate actual binary as
>> libcrypto.so/libssl.so from the build process like following:
>The library "soname" is part of the ABI.  What platform are you
>building for where it would not be appropriate to encode the ABI
>compatibility name into the library name?
>	Viktor.
>openssl-users mailing list
>To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-users

More information about the openssl-users mailing list