[T106][ZXW-22]7520V3SCV2.01.01.02P42U09_VEC_V0.8_AP_VEC origin source commit
Change-Id: Ic6e05d89ecd62fc34f82b23dcf306c93764aec4b
diff --git a/ap/app/ppp-2.4.1/include/openssl/opensslv.h b/ap/app/ppp-2.4.1/include/openssl/opensslv.h
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..71b53ef
--- /dev/null
+++ b/ap/app/ppp-2.4.1/include/openssl/opensslv.h
@@ -0,0 +1,85 @@
+#ifndef HEADER_OPENSSLV_H
+#define HEADER_OPENSSLV_H
+
+/* Numeric release version identifier:
+ * MMNNFFPPS: major minor fix patch status
+ * The status nibble has one of the values 0 for development, 1 to e for betas
+ * 1 to 14, and f for release. The patch level is exactly that.
+ * For example:
+ * 0.9.3-dev 0x00903000
+ * 0.9.3-beta1 0x00903001
+ * 0.9.3-beta2-dev 0x00903002
+ * 0.9.3-beta2 0x00903002 (same as ...beta2-dev)
+ * 0.9.3 0x0090300f
+ * 0.9.3a 0x0090301f
+ * 0.9.4 0x0090400f
+ * 1.2.3z 0x102031af
+ *
+ * For continuity reasons (because 0.9.5 is already out, and is coded
+ * 0x00905100), between 0.9.5 and 0.9.6 the coding of the patch level
+ * part is slightly different, by setting the highest bit. This means
+ * that 0.9.5a looks like this: 0x0090581f. At 0.9.6, we can start
+ * with 0x0090600S...
+ *
+ * (Prior to 0.9.3-dev a different scheme was used: 0.9.2b is 0x0922.)
+ * (Prior to 0.9.5a beta1, a different scheme was used: MMNNFFRBB for
+ * major minor fix final patch/beta)
+ */
+#define OPENSSL_VERSION_NUMBER 0x0090600fL
+#define OPENSSL_VERSION_TEXT "OpenSSL 0.9.6 24 Sep 2000"
+#define OPENSSL_VERSION_PTEXT " part of " OPENSSL_VERSION_TEXT
+
+
+/* The macros below are to be used for shared library (.so, .dll, ...)
+ * versioning. That kind of versioning works a bit differently between
+ * operating systems. The most usual scheme is to set a major and a minor
+ * number, and have the runtime loader check that the major number is equal
+ * to what it was at application link time, while the minor number has to
+ * be greater or equal to what it was at application link time. With this
+ * scheme, the version number is usually part of the file name, like this:
+ *
+ * libcrypto.so.0.9
+ *
+ * Some unixen also make a softlink with the major verson number only:
+ *
+ * libcrypto.so.0
+ *
+ * On True64 it works a little bit differently. There, the shared library
+ * version is stored in the file, and is actually a series of versions,
+ * separated by colons. The rightmost version present in the library when
+ * linking an application is stored in the application to be matched at
+ * run time. When the application is run, a check is done to see if the
+ * library version stored in the application matches any of the versions
+ * in the version string of the library itself.
+ * This version string can be constructed in any way, depending on what
+ * kind of matching is desired. However, to implement the same scheme as
+ * the one used in the other unixen, all compatible versions, from lowest
+ * to highest, should be part of the string. Consecutive builds would
+ * give the following versions strings:
+ *
+ * 3.0
+ * 3.0:3.1
+ * 3.0:3.1:3.2
+ * 4.0
+ * 4.0:4.1
+ *
+ * Notice how version 4 is completely incompatible with version, and
+ * therefore give the breach you can see.
+ *
+ * There may be other schemes as well that I haven't yet discovered.
+ *
+ * So, here's the way it works here: first of all, the library version
+ * number doesn't need at all to match the overall OpenSSL version.
+ * However, it's nice and more understandable if it actually does.
+ * The current library version is stored in the macro SHLIB_VERSION_NUMBER,
+ * which is just a piece of text in the format "M.m.e" (Major, minor, edit).
+ * For the sake of True64 and any other OS that behaves in similar ways,
+ * we need to keep a history of version numbers, which is done in the
+ * macro SHLIB_VERSION_HISTORY. The numbers are separated by colons and
+ * should only keep the versions that are binary compatible with the current.
+ */
+#define SHLIB_VERSION_HISTORY ""
+#define SHLIB_VERSION_NUMBER "0.9.6"
+
+
+#endif /* HEADER_OPENSSLV_H */