Hey Guys

On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 3:34 AM, Guenter <lists_at_gknw.net> wrote:

> Hi Tancho,
> Am 17.07.2012 01:08, schrieb Tancho .:
>
> just to inform you ( I forgot to do it last week )
>> I successfully cross-compiled cUrl for Android with SSL using the
>> standalone toolchain.
>>
> thanks for giving feedback!
>
> My pleasure, you were of tremendous help!

>
> I would suggest removing the Android.mk file which points people in the
>> wrong direction and adding an Android.README file which will explain the
>> process.
>>
> there might be cases where you need such a makefile - different folks have
> different needs;
> unless Dan agrees it should be removed I think we keep it;
> and for those who're hasty and dont read ./docs/INSTALL to get informed of
> another possible way to go once they see an Android.mk in the root we can
> explicitely point to ./docs/INSTALL at the top of the makefile; wouldnt
> that help?
>
> I personally think that it's misleading, since it's close to impossible
to compile using it. so maybe removing it is a bit too radical, but there
should be a warning against it (or something) .

>
> I would gladly document it and provide it with detailed instructions if
>> you want me to.
>>
> hmm, I believe the fact that I successfully run a bunch of Android
> autobuilds even with a bunch of dependency libs proofes that the way I did
> explain in the Android section in ./docs/INSTALL works fine;
> so whats wrong with the Android section in ./docs/INSTALL ?
> what is missing there or unclear?

Actually the ./docs/INSTALL file is quite ok but for a successful build I
needed to link to the android build which Is never mentioned. The only way
to avoid the SSL ENGINE problem was to compile openSSL from the AOSP and
then add the headers & stuff to the exported variables. I believe more info
could help people in that area.

>
>
> I really believe it would help a lot of people who need it.
>>
> Didnt we help you good enough here on the list?
>
> Your help was priceless. I couldn't have done it without you, My point was
that if there is a straightforward compile manual for it people would bug
you less in the list :)

>
> I would provide the binary static lib to anyone on this list who needs
>> it, but I doubt it would be useful since I crippled it to my needs,
>> removed all the supported protocols except HTTP and HTTPS and also most
>> of the other stuff which I did not need. If someone needs it please
>> reply, I will gladly share.
>>
> thats the prob: everyone has other needs, and if I would provide a devel
> package with everything in some would complain about too much stuff, while
> with a devel package with only http/https support the next comes and
> complains about missing XYZ ... ;-)
>
> Exactly, my proposal was meant for the other people searching the net for
the lib port etc.. I know you don't need it :)

> and BTW please dont top-post:
> http://curl.haxx.se/mail/**etiquette.html#Do_Not_Top_Post<http://curl.haxx.se/mail/etiquette.html#Do_Not_Top_Post>
>
>
> Gün.
>
>
>
> ------------------------------**------------------------------**-------
> List admin: http://cool.haxx.se/list/**listinfo/curl-library<http://cool.haxx.se/list/listinfo/curl-library>
> Etiquette: http://curl.haxx.se/mail/**etiquette.html<http://curl.haxx.se/mail/etiquette.html>
>

-------------------------------------------------------------------
List admin: http://cool.haxx.se/list/listinfo/curl-library
Etiquette: http://curl.haxx.se/mail/etiquette.html
Received on 2012-07-17