| From: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Christoph Berg <myon(at)debian(dot)org>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Felix Lechner <felix(dot)lechner(at)lease-up(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Fwd: PostgreSQL: WolfSSL support |
| Date: | 2020-06-27 15:10:35 |
| Message-ID: | 20200627151035.GB16644@momjian.us |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sat, Jun 27, 2020 at 10:56:46AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> writes:
> > On Sat, Jun 27, 2020 at 02:50:27PM +0200, Christoph Berg wrote:
> >> Re: Peter Eisentraut
> >>> What would be the advantage of using wolfSSL over OpenSSL?
>
> >> Avoiding the OpenSSL-vs-GPL linkage problem with readline.
>
> > Uh, wolfSSL is GPL2:
> > https://www.wolfssl.com/license/
>
> Readline is GPLv3+ (according to Red Hat's labeling of that package
> anyway, didn't check the source). So they'd be compatible, while
> openssl's license is nominally incompatible with GPL. As I recall,
> Debian jumps through some silly hoops to pretend that they're not
> using openssl and readline at the same time with Postgres, so I
> can definitely understand Christoph's interest in an alternative.
>
> However, judging from the caveats mentioned in the initial message,
> my inclination would be to wait awhile for wolfSSL to mature.
Also, wolfSSL is developed by a company and dual GPL/commerical
licenses, so it seems like a mismatch to me.
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> https://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB https://enterprisedb.com
The usefulness of a cup is in its emptiness, Bruce Lee
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2020-06-27 15:16:26 | Re: Fwd: PostgreSQL: WolfSSL support |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2020-06-27 14:56:46 | Re: Fwd: PostgreSQL: WolfSSL support |