On Tue, 31 May 2016 07:56:21 +0200 Franziskus Kiefer <fkie...@mozilla.com> wrote:
> thanks for your feedback. That's a great use-case of ecl as standalone > library. Removal of ecl as a library is part of a bigger effort to > clean up NSS and make it easier to use. > > As far as I can see the low level elliptic curve calculation functions > > aren't exposed as public functions in NSS itself. > > > You're right. But dropping ecl builds goes together with the work in > [1], which allows you to build NSS with FREEBL_TEST=1 (the exact name > might change) that provides you with an NSS build (a freebl library) > that exposes all internal functions. This makes testing of NSS (in > particular freebl internals) simpler and allows you to do for example > the things you used the standalone ecl library for. > > Would this work for you? The only difference would be the library you > link against and that you have to build all of NSS. Based on my experience the build of NSS is much murkier than the build of libmpi/libecl. Of course this is an issue on its own which maybe should be improved in general. I always found it very convenient that libmpi/libecl could be built as a static library (.a) very easily with custom cflag/cc settings. As far as I'm aware there is no easy way to do this with nss. Also cflags/cc variable handling seems rather unusual and things like USE_64 complicate things. If things were as simple as make FREEBL_TEST=1 CC=[something] CXX=[something] libnss.a then I'd be happy, but I think it ain't that easy right now. -- Hanno Böck https://hboeck.de/ mail/jabber: ha...@hboeck.de GPG: BBB51E42
pgpoZ9kK2OFag.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
-- dev-tech-crypto mailing list dev-tech-crypto@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-tech-crypto
