In message <CANt7B+c+A1=kadnOZo3uGjy0pPE_3vmUF--PmxEZ_pYs+QWphA at mail.gmail.com> on Fri, 16 Sep 2016 09:43:37 +0200, Kim Gr?sman <kim.grasman at gmail.com> said: kim.grasman> Hi Richard, kim.grasman> kim.grasman> On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 12:08 AM, Richard Levitte <levitte at openssl.org> wrote: kim.grasman> > In message <CANt7B+feUe2W7627Nrw5bVOnZ1Wb5uQ4z57=ry9LwE7d0b28_w at mail.gmail.com> on Thu, 15 Sep 2016 12:17:12 +0200, Kim Gr?sman <kim.grasman at gmail.com> said: kim.grasman> > kim.grasman> > kim.grasman> I'm looking at integrating OpenSSL 1.1 in our tree, and I noticed the kim.grasman> > kim.grasman> Windows build system now produces decorated lib names. kim.grasman> > kim.grasman> > For DLLs, yes. kim.grasman> > kim.grasman> > kim.grasman> The general pattern seems to be lib<name>_<ver>[-<arch>].lib where kim.grasman> > kim.grasman> <arch> is only appended for 64-bit builds. kim.grasman> > kim.grasman> > Are you sure? Looking at my builds, I find libcrypto-1_1.dll and kim.grasman> > libssl-1_1.dll with the import libraries libcrypto.lib and kim.grasman> > libssl.lib. kim.grasman> kim.grasman> Ahem. I *was* sure, but with a clean build, I can see you're absolutely right. kim.grasman> kim.grasman> I must have mixed up the DLL names and import lib names at some point. kim.grasman> kim.grasman> Sorry about the confusion! That's for confirming. Cheers, Richard -- Richard Levitte levitte at openssl.org OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org/~levitte/
