From: | Abel Abraham Camarillo Ojeda <acamari(at)verlet(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Christoph Berg <myon(at)debian(dot)org>, Ranier Vilela <ranier(dot)vf(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Felix Lechner <felix(dot)lechner(at)lease-up(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: PostgreSQL: WolfSSL support |
Date: | 2020-06-28 02:52:38 |
Message-ID: | CAPD=2NhHbH2dDE+LZRfrfTwRvMgfC8sfQ7QYNfTrctZhTaS-aw@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Saturday, June 27, 2020, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Christoph Berg <myon(at)debian(dot)org> writes:
> > Re: Ranier Vilela
> >> Isn't LIbreSSL a better alternative?
>
> > I don't know.
>
> It should work all right --- it's the default ssl library on OpenBSD
> and some other platforms, so we have some buildfarm coverage for it.
> (AFAICT, none of the OpenBSD machines are running the ssl test, but
> I tried that just now on OpenBSD 6.4 and it passed.)
>
> However, I'm not exactly convinced that using LibreSSL gets you out
> of the license compatibility bind. LibreSSL is a fork of OpenSSL,
> and IIUC a fairly hostile fork at that, so how did they get permission
> to remove OpenSSL's problematic license clauses? Did they remove them
> at all? A quick look at the header files on my OpenBSD installation
> shows a whole lot of ancient copyright text.
As I understand Libressl objective is not to change the license of existing
code but to deprecate features they don't want in it.
They also include in Libressl a new libtls which is ISC licensed, but it's
another history
> regards, tom lane
>
>
>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Fabien COELHO | 2020-06-28 06:13:47 | Re: update substring pattern matching syntax |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2020-06-27 22:54:04 | Re: pg_bsd_indent compiles bytecode |