aes_encrypt() symbol is a common one, wolfssl and/or some other ssl modules appear to define the same symbol.
Would it be acceptable to rename the public functions in aes.h to add a 'lora_' prefix? like lora_aes_encrypt()?
If so I can open a PR with said change.
I'm guessing there may be ways to fix this with various build options but that seemed like a significant amount of additional effort, although fewer changes to the stack here.
Thoughts? We'd like to not carry any local changes around (and today we've renamed aes_encrypt() to lora_aes_encrypt() to resolve this issue).
aes_encrypt() symbol is a common one, wolfssl and/or some other ssl modules appear to define the same symbol.
Would it be acceptable to rename the public functions in aes.h to add a 'lora_' prefix? like lora_aes_encrypt()?
If so I can open a PR with said change.
I'm guessing there may be ways to fix this with various build options but that seemed like a significant amount of additional effort, although fewer changes to the stack here.
Thoughts? We'd like to not carry any local changes around (and today we've renamed aes_encrypt() to lora_aes_encrypt() to resolve this issue).