From: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se>, 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: | 2019-12-06 01:33:23 |
Message-ID: | 20191206013323.GE121835@paquier.xyz |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Dec 05, 2019 at 10:38:55AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> 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.
Thanks. Another argument in favor of dropping 1.0.0 and 0.9.8 is that
it is a pain to check an OpenSSL patch across that many versions,
multiplied by the number of Postgres branches in need of patching :)
> I see nothing to object to in this patch set.
I have applied 0001 on HEAD for now as that's a simple cleanup (I
would not backpatch that though). For 0002, I would prefer be sure
that we reach the right conclusion. My take is to:
1) Apply 0002 only on HEAD to remove the check for clear_options.
2) Apply something like Daniel's patch in [1] for REL_12_STABLE and
REL_11_STABLE as we care about this routine since e3bdb2d to not mess
up with past versions of NetBSD which worked previously on our
released branches. (The patch looks fine at quick glance and I
haven't tested it yet)
[1]: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/3C636E88-44C7-40C6-ABA3-1B236E0A74DE@yesql.se
--
Michael
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2019-12-06 01:57:14 | Re: Session WAL activity |
Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2019-12-06 01:11:37 | Re: [Proposal] Level4 Warnings show many shadow vars |