> You are both correct; the point of NO_OPENSSL is not to link with anything > from openssl suite, so we need a separate mechanism to address this. > > Anders, wouldn't this be a better fix for NO_OPENSSL build, than reverting > a fix for an incorrect ld invocation? Could we get this fixup patch into master? Leaving the original patch in without it doesn't seem like a good idea when it breaks the build. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html