Re: Removal of support for OpenSSL 0.9.8 and 1.0.0

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se>
Cc: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Removal of support for OpenSSL 0.9.8 and 1.0.0
Date: 2019-12-05 15:38:55
Message-ID: 15111.1575560335@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se> writes:
>> On 5 Dec 2019, at 09:32, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> wrote:
>> From the point of view of the code, the cleanup is not actually that
>> amazing I am afraid, a jump directly to 1.1.0 would remove much more
>> because the breakages were wider when we integrated it. Anyway, those
>> cleanups are part of 0003. I thought that this would have resulted in
>> more cleanup :(

> While expected, it's still disappointing. Until we can drop 1.0.2 there isn't
> too much to gain, and that will likely be reasonably far into the future given
> that it's the final version that can run the FIPS module.

Yeah; also as mentioned in the other thread, 1.0.1 is still in use
in RHEL 6, so it's hard to consider dropping that for at least another
year. I concur with the conclusion that we can stop worrying about
NetBSD 5, though.

I see nothing to object to in this patch set.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2019-12-05 15:50:05 Re: [EUC_CN] Failed to connect through user created user/database using simplified Chinese characters
Previous Message Robert Haas 2019-12-05 15:29:24 Re: Online checksums patch - once again