PROBLEMS

* System libcrypto.dylib and libssl.dylib are used by system ld on MacOS X.


    NOTE: The problem described here only applies when OpenSSL isn't built
    with shared library support (i.e. without the "shared" configuration
    option).  If you build with shared library support, you will have no
    problems as long as you set up DYLD_LIBRARY_PATH properly at all times.


This is really a misfeature in ld, which seems to look for .dylib libraries
along the whole library path before it bothers looking for .a libraries.  This
means that -L switches won't matter unless OpenSSL is built with shared
library support.

The workaround may be to change the following lines in apps/Makefile.ssl and
test/Makefile.ssl:

  LIBCRYPTO=-L.. -lcrypto
  LIBSSL=-L.. -lssl

to:

  LIBCRYPTO=../libcrypto.a
  LIBSSL=../libssl.a

It's possible that something similar is needed for shared library support
as well.  That hasn't been well tested yet.


Another solution that many seem to recommend is to move the libraries
/usr/lib/libcrypto.0.9.dylib, /usr/lib/libssl.0.9.dylib to a different
directory, build and install OpenSSL and anything that depends on your
build, then move libcrypto.0.9.dylib and libssl.0.9.dylib back to their
original places.  Note that the version numbers on those two libraries
may differ on your machine.


As long as Apple doesn't fix the problem with ld, this problem building
OpenSSL will remain as is.


* Parallell make leads to errors

While running tests, running a parallell make is a bad idea.  Many test
scripts use the same name for output and input files, which means different
will interfere with each other and lead to test failure.

The solution is simple for now: don't run parallell make when testing.


* Bugs in gcc 3.0 triggered

According to a problem report, there are bugs in gcc 3.0 that are
triggered by some of the code in OpenSSL, more specifically in
PEM_get_EVP_CIPHER_INFO().  The triggering code is the following:

	header+=11;
	if (*header != '4') return(0); header++;
	if (*header != ',') return(0); header++;

What happens is that gcc might optimize a little too agressively, and
you end up with an extra incrementation when *header != '4'.

We recommend that you upgrade gcc to as high a 3.x version as you can.