| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se> |
| Cc: | Jacob Champion <jacob(dot)champion(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Cutting support for OpenSSL 1.0.1 and 1.0.2 in 17~? |
| Date: | 2024-04-03 22:06:02 |
| Message-ID: | 386777.1712181962@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 3 Apr 2024, at 19:38, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> Bottom line for me is that pulling 1.0.1 support now is OK,
>> but I think pulling 1.0.2 is premature.
> Is Red Hat building and and shipping v17 packages for RHEL7 ELS customers? If
> not then it seems mostly academical to tie our dependencies to RHEL ELS unless
> I'm missing something.
True, they won't be doing that, and neither will Devrim. So maybe
we can leave RHEL7 out of the discussion, in which case there's
not a lot of reason to keep 1.0.2 support. We'll need to notify
buildfarm owners to adjust their configurations.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andres Freund | 2024-04-03 22:12:57 | Re: Streaming read-ready sequential scan code |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2024-04-03 21:58:55 | Re: Security lessons from liblzma - libsystemd |