VS2013 Compiling with header redirection IDE complains. "Open SSL"
Hello im trying to compile a project that uses Open SSL but i have a problem since compiler complains about this on some headers
The files are empty and only containing this line:
"../../crypto/md5/md5.h"
I understood that those headers redirect to the actual file in a different path from the include folder, must work in other compilers but VS2013 complains about it.
Im planing to work arround it like copying those files directly in the include folder or even take the time to redirect those includes to the actual file one by one but im guessing that there is a simpler way.
The reason Im asking is cause i have no idea how to search about the solution or where are the terms.
Thx for your time!!
Re: VS2013 Compiling with header redirection IDE complains. "Open SSL"
If you don't want to compile OpenSSL yourself (which is needed to create the "sdk" tree structure), then you can try compiling against a pre-built version of OpenSSL: http://slproweb.com/products/Win32OpenSSL.html
gg
Re: VS2013 Compiling with header redirection IDE complains. "Open SSL"
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Codeplug
Thanks for your answer, I was thinking about it... but my great doub is im using VS2013, in that page says is for VS2008 will it work with VS2013?.
Re: VS2013 Compiling with header redirection IDE complains. "Open SSL"
Yes, it will work.
The OpenSSL DLL's will use the VS2008 CRT internally. So your app installer will need to provide both the 2008 and 2013 redistributables. So you'll need the 2008 redistributable installed on your dev PC as well.
gg
Re: VS2013 Compiling with header redirection IDE complains. "Open SSL"
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Codeplug
Yes, it will work.
The OpenSSL DLL's will use the VS2008 CRT internally. So your app installer will need to provide both the 2008 and 2013 redistributables. So you'll need the 2008 redistributable installed on your dev PC as well.
gg
Thx for your time!!
I Knew i could use the dlls but the thing is that i wanted to use the static version... but in case i really need to use the dll version would be a pain in the ... to deploy a dll that will also requiere another runtime... I dont understand why microsoft releases a runtime almost every year, how do you make a standard like that only creates big headaches for us developers.
If i need to use a dll i would rather to use dll that wont requiere aditional runtime :/
