| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Victor Wagner <vitus(at)wagner(dot)pp(dot)ru>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: PostgreSQL12 and older versions of OpenSSL |
| Date: | 2019-09-24 15:25:30 |
| Message-ID: | 19585.1569338730@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> ... I wonder if we should really continue to support
> OpenSSL 0.9.8.
Fair question, but post-rc1 is no time to be moving that goalpost
for the v12 branch.
> Anyway I suppose it's not impossible that third parties are still
> maintaining their 1.0.0 branch,
Another data point on that is that Red Hat is still supporting
1.0.1e in RHEL6. I don't think we should assume that just because
OpenSSL upstream has dropped support for a branch, it no longer
exists in the wild.
Having said that, if it makes our lives noticeably easier to
drop support for 0.9.8 in HEAD, I won't stand in the way.
(We should survey the buildfarm and see what the older critters
are running, perhaps.)
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Antonin Houska | 2019-09-24 15:33:24 | Re: Attempt to consolidate reading of XLOG page |
| Previous Message | Nikolay Shaplov | 2019-09-24 15:20:31 | Re: [PATCH] src/test/modules/dummy_index -- way to test reloptions from inside of access method |