On 11/13/06, Daniel Stenberg <daniel_at_haxx.se> wrote:
>
>
> Personally, I wouldn't dream of writing software without makefiles. I've
> never
> understood people who like the tools to magically attempt to do all those
> things behind your back. Call me grumpy or old school, but that's me! ;-)

Personally, I prefer the dsp (easier to understand and has all the power of
make files).
I would really like to have a dsp with several (4 or more) build options:
a. release (no ssl)
b. debug (no ssl)
c. release with openssl
d. debug with openssl
Since there is no such project file maintained in CVS, I would create my
own, based on the supplied curllib.dsp.
Tell me if you think it may interest other people. If so, I can send it to
you when I finish (this is the least I could do for you and the open source
community).

You can easily verify that by trying a HTTPS URL, or possibly call
> curl_version() and see if it replies with an openssl version included.

I did that, and a simple https request (according to the example) works
well. I guess I'm ok here.

> 4) The following is taken from openssl 0.9.8 FAQ:
> > "Note that debug and release libraries are NOT interchangeable. If you
> > built OpenSSL with /MD your application must use /MD and cannot use
> /MDd.
>
> [...]
>
> > So does it influence the build process of libcurl? Should I include
> > applink.c in the libcurl.dsp in case I'm using /MD for building libcurl?
>
> I can't respond to this. I have no idea.

In the meanwhile I built libcurl with the /MD without the applink.c file.
There was no link problems and I succeeded sending an https request.

Regards,
Ori.
Received on 2006-11-14