Bugs item #1326676, was opened at 2005-10-14 13:53
Message generated for change (Comment added) made by temprimus
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=100976&aid=1326676&group_id=976

Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread,
including the initial issue submission, for this request,
not just the latest update.
Category: compile or build problem
Group: wrong behaviour
Status: Open
Resolution: None
Priority: 3
Submitted By: TemPRImuS (temprimus)
Assigned to: Daniel Stenberg (bagder)
Summary: SSLLIBS linked for static ssl in Makefile.vc6

Initial Comment:
The configuration debug-ssl and debug-ssl-zlib links
the SSL libraries to the result. The release-ssl and
release-ssl-zlib does not link them. I like the
behaviour of the release builds more.

code: Makefile.vc6 :

line 251 : LNK = $(LNKLIB) $(SSLLIBS) $(LFLAGSSSL)
/out:$(DIROBJ)\

line 288 : LNK = $(LNKLIB) $(SSLLIBS) $(ZLIBLIBS)
$(LFLAGSSSL) $(LFLAGSZLIB) /out:$(DIROBJ)\

----------------------------------------------------------------------

>Comment By: TemPRImuS (temprimus)
Date: 2005-10-14 16:52

Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=1359436

Sorry if it wasn't clear. This is for the static ssl
versions in the debug builds. I meant I want to link the
static ssl libraries to the executable myself and not to the
libcurld.lib. This is how the release versions work.
For example if I wish to debug (or not to debug) the openssl
library then I want to have a choice which one of the ssl
libraries to link to the executable.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: Daniel Stenberg (bagder)
Date: 2005-10-14 15:20

Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=1110

Isn't it often easier to debug these things if you link
statically than when using DLLs?

----------------------------------------------------------------------

You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=100976&aid=1326676&group_id=976
Received on 2005-10-14