Login
Username:

Password:

Remember me



Lost Password?

Register now!
Main Menu
Who's Online
2 user(s) are online (1 user(s) are browsing Forum)

Members: 1
Guests: 1

trekiej, more...

Browsing this Thread:   1 Anonymous Users



« 1 (2)


Re: AmiSSL 4.1 Release

Joined:
2004/3/29 9:54
From Scotland "The Cold"
Group:
Member
Posts: 2024
Offline
Quote:

kas1e_ar wrote:
Can anyone explain needs of that native amigassl port ? I mean, what wrong with staticaly linked openssl libs, which have no needs to be wrapped by amiga-native-library-only-for-make-it-look-more-amiga. Or i miss something and amissl doing something and give us something which pure openssl port (./configure;make) can't ?


A> Binaries with SSL linked are massively bloated.
B> It is plain stupid to go backwards from a shared library that can be easily upgraded separately from the things using it, to having them all statically linked to it.

It has nothing to do with making it look "more amiga like" - a lot of code expects to use the AmiSSL API to access the SSL code and would need modified to work with openssl directly, and having the code directly linked is just plain stupid if it can be done in a shared way. It is more memory efficient, faster to load, etc, etc.

Posted on: 3/17 7:23
_________________
Click to see original Image in a new window
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer


Re: AmiSSL 4.1 Release

Joined:
2007/10/19 1:51
Group:
Member
Posts: 493
Offline
> Binaries with SSL linked are massively bloated.

massively bloated ! too much for additional 0.5 mb, nope ?:)

> It is plain stupid to go backwards from a shared library that can be easily upgraded separately from the things using it, to having them all statically linked to it.

What is more stupid, its being forced to wait years for amissl being updated, instead of just grab when you want latest openssl, and rebuild your apps.

> a lot of code expects to use the AmiSSL API to access the SSL code and would need modified to work with openssl directly

What code ? Ibrowse only ?:)

My point is : that all fancy good to have amissl, but if one want to make anything with ssl, it is better to attach another 0.5 mb but be sure that once new verson of openssl out, you can rebuild your projects without that "amiga waiting of years for simple things". And calling that "stupid" and "massively bloated" sounds like only amiga, sorry :)

Posted on: 3/19 10:45
_________________
my blog: aros/aos4/mos projects & articles

Join us to port dopus5 to amigang platforms here
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer


Re: AmiSSL 4.1 Release

Joined:
2008/1/7 12:41
From Poland
Group:
Dev
Posts: 2923
Offline
There is no one-size-fits-all. With static ssl you have faster time with market with your applications, with shared you have better maintainability over longer time frame. You see the downside of static when an application is no longer maintained. I.e. I would prefer to use shared version of ssl in Odyssey - its refresh cycle will be slower than that of amissl.

Posted on: 3/20 10:12
_________________
Krzysztof

"There is no such thing as software for free. If it is not the user who covers the cost of software creation with money, it is the developer who covers this cost with his own free time."

www.aros3d.org
www.twitter.com/ddeadwood
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer



« 1 (2)



You can view topic.
You cannot start a new topic.
You cannot reply to posts.
You cannot edit your posts.
You cannot delete your posts.
You cannot add new polls.
You cannot vote in polls.
You cannot attach files to posts.
You cannot post without approval.

[Advanced Search]


Search
Top Posters
1 paolone
paolone
4358
2 magorium
magorium
4095
3 phoenixkonsole
phoenixkonsole
3892
4 nikolaos
nikolaos
3693
5 deadwood
deadwood
2923
6 ncafferkey
ncafferkey
2643
7 mazze
mazze
2214
8 clusteruk
clusteruk
2109
9 Kalamatee
Kalamatee
2024
10 damocles
damocles
1789
© 2004-2017 AROS Exec