From: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Date: Wed, 01 Oct 2008 16:04:18 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH, resent] fix openssl headers conflicting with custom SHA1 implementations
Message-ID: <20081001160418.GA13917@coredump.intra.peff.net>
In-Reply-To: <20081001155458.GF21310@spearce.org>

On Wed, Oct 01, 2008 at 08:54:58AM -0700, Shawn O. Pearce wrote:

> >   void ARM_SHA1_Init()
> > 
> > and
> > 
> >   #define SHA1_Init ARM_SHA1_Init
> 
> Ick.  I agree that renaming our SHA1 implementation to a different
> set of symbols is the right solution.  But this could cause trouble
> in any code that needs both SHA1 implementation and OpenSSL,
> especially if a SHA_CTX was passed to a function in another module.

Yes. You're never going to be able to get access to _both_
implementations if they have the same name. ;)

> I think its easy enough to just rename our SHA_CTX and SHA_*
> functions to something more git specific.  Since its mostly a global

I think that is the cleanest and simplest solution. As for merging pain,
I think Junio would generally do a mechanical change like this as the
first thing after a release. However, in this case, I think we might
want it sooner if the conflict is causing breakage.

-Peff