Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

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 (view raw or flat)
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

pgsql-hackers by date

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

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group