Re: Cutting support for OpenSSL 1.0.1 and 1.0.2 in 17~?

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se>
Cc: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Cutting support for OpenSSL 1.0.1 and 1.0.2 in 17~?
Date: 2023-05-24 14:15:41
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se> writes:
> It would be nice it the OpenSSL project could grant us an LTS license for a
> buildfarm animal to ensure compatibility but I have no idea how realistic that
> is (or how much the LTS version of 1.0.2 has diverged from the last available
> public 1.0.2 version).

Surely the answer must be "not much". The entire point of an LTS
version is to not have to change dusty calling applications.

We had definitely better have some animals still using 1.0.2, but
I don't see much reason to think that the last public release
wouldn't be good enough.

regards, tom lane

In response to


Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Hans Buschmann 2023-05-24 14:33:06 Proposal: Removing 32 bit support starting from PG17++
Previous Message Tristan Partin 2023-05-24 13:58:46 Re: Make pgbench exit on SIGINT more reliably