Re: OpenSSL 3.0.0 compatibility

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: OpenSSL 3.0.0 compatibility
Date: 2020-07-08 14:51:36
Message-ID: CA+TgmobPs8_-5cYA55AepLQOnUjpfrc=KLhETxNmWuMF32j40g@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Jul 7, 2020 at 1:46 PM Peter Eisentraut
<peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> 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.

So, if we go this way, does that mean that we're not going to pursue
removing dependencies on the deprecated interfaces? I wonder if we
really ought to be doing that too, with preprocessor conditionals.
Otherwise, aren't we putting ourselves in an uncomfortable situation
when the deprecated stuff eventually goes away upstream?

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Juan José Santamaría Flecha 2020-07-08 15:07:08 Re: TAP tests and symlinks on Windows
Previous Message Robert Haas 2020-07-08 14:44:11 Re: [PATCH] postgres_fdw connection caching - cause remote sessions linger till the local session exit