and make all files the depend on it include it without prefixing it
with openssl/.
This means that all Makefiles will have $(TOP) as one of the include
directories.
sure they are available in opensslconf.h, by giving them names starting
with "OPENSSL_" to avoid conflicts with other packages and by making
sure e_os2.h will cover all platform-specific cases together with
opensslconf.h.
I've checked fairly well that nothing breaks with this (apart from
external software that will adapt if they have used something like
NO_KRB5), but I can't guarantee it completely, so a review of this
change would be a good thing.
casts) used in the lhash code are about as horrible and evil as they can
be. For starters, the callback prototypes contain empty parameter lists.
Yuck.
This first change defines clearer prototypes - including "typedef"'d
function pointer types to use as "hash" and "compare" callbacks, as well as
the callbacks passed to the lh_doall and lh_doall_arg iteration functions.
Now at least more explicit (and clear) casting is required in all of the
dependant code - and that should be included in this commit.
The next step will be to hunt down and obliterate some of the function
pointer casting being used when it's not necessary - a particularly evil
variant exists in the implementation of lh_doall.
was a really bad idea. For example, the following:
#include <x509.h>
#include <bio.h>
#include <asn1.h>
would make sure that things like ASN1_UTCTIME_print() wasn't defined
unless you moved the inclusion of bio.h to above the inclusion of
x509.h. The reason is that x509.h includes asn1.h, and the
declaration of ASN1_UTCTIME_print() depended on the definition of
HEADER_BIO_H. That's what I call an obscure bug.
Instead, this change makes sure that whatever header files are needed
for the correct process of one header file are included automagically,
and that the definitions of, for example, BIO-related things are
dependent on the absence of the NO_{foo} macros. This is also
consistent with the way parts of OpenSSL can be excluded at will.
like Malloc, Realloc and especially Free conflict with already existing names
on some operating systems or other packages. That is reason enough to change
the names of the OpenSSL memory allocation macros to something that has a
better chance of being unique, like prepending them with OPENSSL_.
This change includes all the name changes needed throughout all C files.
"Jan Mikkelsen" <janm@transactionsite.com> correctly states that the
OpenSSL header files have #include's and extern "C"'s in an incorrect
order. Thusly fixed.
in cryptlib.h (which is often included as "../cryptlib.h"), then the
question remains relative to which directory this is to be interpreted.
gcc went one further directory up, as intended; but makedepend thinks
differently, and so probably do some C compilers. So the ../ must go away;
thus e_os.h goes back into include/openssl (but I now use
#include "openssl/e_os.h" instead of <openssl/e_os.h> to make the point) --
and we have another huge bunch of dependency changes. Argh.
There were problems with putting e_os.h just into the top directory,
because the test programs are compiled within test/ in the "standard"
case in in their original directories in the makefile.one case;
and in the latter symlinks may not be available.
script, translates function codes better and doesn't need the K&R function
prototypes to work (NB. the K&R prototypes can't be wiped just yet: they are
still needed by the DEF generator...). I also ran the script with the -rewrite
option to update all the header and source files.
consistent in the source tree and replaced `/bin/rm' by `rm'. Additonally
cleaned up the `make links' target: Remove unnecessary semicolons, subsequent
redundant removes, inline point.sh into mklink.sh to speed processing and no
longer clutter the display with confusing stuff. Instead only the actually
done links are displayed.
1. The already released version was 0.9.1c and not 0.9.1b
2. The next release should be 0.9.2 and not 0.9.1d, because
first the changes are already too large, second we should avoid any more
0.9.1x confusions and third, the Apache version semantics of
VERSION.REVISION.PATCHLEVEL for the version string is reasonable (and here
.2 is already just a patchlevel and not major change).
tVS: ----------------------------------------------------------------------
