Re: TODO: GNU TLS

From: Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>
To: David Boreham <david_list(at)boreham(dot)org>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, mark(at)mark(dot)mielke(dot)cc, Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org>, Mark Kirkwood <markir(at)paradise(dot)net(dot)nz>
Subject: Re: TODO: GNU TLS
Date: 2007-01-02 18:29:35
Message-ID: 20070102182935.GD24675@kenobi.snowman.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

* David Boreham (david_list(at)boreham(dot)org) wrote:
> Stephen Frost wrote:
> >Not sure what license that's under,
> >
> From http://www.mozilla.org/projects/security/pki/nss/:
> 'NSS is available under the Mozilla Public License, the GNU General
> Public License, and the GNU Lesser General Public License.'

Works for me then, and it's already packaged in Debian. The only
downside that I can see is that the work isn't done yet and if we want
to support both OpenSSL and NSS then the patch will be at least somewhat
invasive/large (since I doubt NSS's API is anything like OpenSSL's,
please correct me if I'm wrong).

Would a patch to implement dual-support for OpenSSL and NSS be
acceptable? Would just replacing OpenSSL support with NSS support be
better?

Thanks,

Stephen

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Greg Sabino Mullane 2007-01-02 18:36:29 Re: Rare corruption of pg_class index
Previous Message D. Hageman 2007-01-02 18:23:59 8.2 Crash on Query