Re: To gnupg or not to gnupg ... (was Re: Assertion while pui-list-packages)

SL Baur wrote on 4-December-1998: ->make gnupg_extensions= Ah, clever... Still fails to build other bits in some strange ways. (In other words, I don't know what I'm doing). I think the gnupg "team" need the help of someone like Martin... (mild hint). Got rid of more gcc garbage options... ________________________________________________________________________ mpicalc.c: cc -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I. -I.. -I../include -g -c mpicalc.c "mpicalc.c", line 214: non-constant initializer: op "U&" "mpicalc.c", line 214: non-constant initializer: op "U&" These are in main from the ARGPARSE_ARGS type, ARGPARSE_ARGS pargs = { &argc, &argv, 0 }; So I just declared it and put these in pargs.argc = &argc; pargs.argv = &argv; ________________________________________________________________________ status.c Cast shm_area to char * (from volatile char *) in call to mlock. Stop cpr_kill_prompt returning a value. (kill the tty then return). ________________________________________________________________________ This then builds the whole shebang, but the "binary" isn't fully linked, it's just a library. (No main I guess). bash$ file /opt/bin/gpg /opt/bin/gpg: ELF 32-bit MSB relocatable SPARC Version 1 ->Um, what does having a weak RNG have to do with signing with a key ->generated with a strong RNG? Hell knows. I'd see a doctor if I had a weak RNG. ;-) I think the best thing I can do is get in contact with Herr Koch. nic -- Dr N.J.Doye, Systems Programmer, CHEST and NISS Centre, University of Bath, Claverton Down, Bath, Somerset. BA2 7AY. England