It seems that own of the only ways of dealing with the OpenSSL code is to strip out the code for a large number of, should we say "less used platforms". Is the OpenSSL developers willing to drop support for 16 bit Windows or OpenVMS?
-/* Added for T3E, address-of fails on bit field (beckman@acl.lanl.gov) */
-#ifndef BIT_FIELD_LIMITS
memcpy(&server.sin_addr.s_addr, ip, 4);
-#else
- memcpy(&server.sin_addr, ip, 4);
-#endif
They either need to properly maintain it or drop it, and they don't have enough money to maintain it.
There are recent builds of OpenSSL for OpenVMS:
http://polarhome.com/openssl/ http://www.openvms.org/stories.php?story=14/04/11/6422157
HP's version is a bit older:
http://h71000.www7.hp.com/openvms/products/ssl/ssl.html
Free OpenVMS accounts:
Is there anything except resources that prevent you from moving to a more modern platform? Of course, "it works" is a valid argument there, too. But you seem to be writing new code, too.
OpenVMS has some really good ideas baked into the OS that we've had to reimplement or find off-the-shelf solutions for our new platform (for example a distributed key-value store (called "logicals"), a job queue system, and a clustered filesystem) but nothing so earth-shattering that it would keep us on VMS.
The biggest downsides are expensive hardware (OpenVMS is designed around clusters of a few beefy boxes, rather than many commodity boxes), lack of community knowledge, and lack of new software available for the platform. (End of life is also looming: http://h71000.www7.hp.com/openvms/openvms_supportchart.html .)