Two openssl+static build problems...

In attempting to build a completely static ruby, I've discovered a few 
issues.

The setup..
===========
I've built static versions of readline, zlib, iconv, dbm, and openssl. 
My intention is to build a completely static ruby, including all 
possible extensions.


Issue #1
========

Problem
-------
If you build openssl with zlib support, then Ruby's ext/openssl 
extension will not build.  This is because the extconf.rb needs to 
include "-lz".  Note, if your libssl.a is build *without* zlib, Ruby 
does attempt to build ext/openssl.  This only happens when you build 
libssl.a *with* zlib support.

Resolution
----------
In the openssl extension, I suggest adding a test to see if "-lz" (zlib) 
exists.  If it does, then include "-lz" on all of the subsequent openssl 
specific tests.  I don't exactly know how to do this due to 
unfamiliarity with Ruby's extension build system.


Issue #2
========

Problem
-------
When using a static openssl library (libssl.a), and all static 
extensions (--with-static-linked-ext), the openssl digest functions 
(SHA) conflict with the same named symbols in ext/digest.  I imagine 
this works fine under the *non-static* case because the symbols are 
resolved at runtime; however, in the *static* case, the symbols must be 
unique at link time -- and they are not.

Resolution
----------
I don't know about this one either - because Ruby's build system is 
already somewhat of a magical mystery to me.  However, it seems that we 
need a mechanism to automagically choose which lib to link.  In the case 
of a static libssl.a, the ext/digest functions should be considered "weak".


Closing Notes
=============
If *anyone* knows *anything* about this, or has had similar experience, 
please let me know.  Furthermore, if there's a more appropriate place to 
send this kind of thing than ruby-core, let me know that too.


Thanks,
Steve