From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: OpenSSL 3.0.0 compatibility |
Date: | 2020-07-07 17:45:58 |
Message-ID: | 6b13734e-486c-5025-c645-1c7b1a738178@2ndquadrant.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2020-05-30 11:29, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> My proposal would be to introduce OPENSSL_API_COMPAT=10001 into master
> after the 13/14 branching, along with any other changes to make it
> compile cleanly against OpenSSL 3.0.0. Once that has survived some
> scrutiny from the buildfarm and also from folks building against
> LibreSSL etc., it should probably be backpatched into PG13. In the
> immediate future, I wouldn't bother about the older branches (<=PG12) at
> all. As long as they still compile, users can just disable deprecation
> warnings, and we may add some patches to that effect at some point, but
> it's not like OpenSSL 3.0.0 will be adopted into production builds any
> time soon.
Trying to move this along, where would be a good place to define
OPENSSL_API_COMPAT? The only place that's shared between frontend and
backend code is c.h. The attached patch does it that way.
--
Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
0001-Define-OPENSSL_API_COMPAT.patch | text/plain | 1.1 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2020-07-07 17:46:17 | Re: SIGSEGV from START_REPLICATION 0/XXXXXXX in XLogSendPhysical () at walsender.c:2762 |
Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2020-07-07 17:12:16 | Re: Default setting for enable_hashagg_disk (hash_mem) |