| From: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(dot)dunstan(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, 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: | 2020-06-03 05:26:07 |
| Message-ID: | 20200603052607.GH89559@paquier.xyz |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Jun 02, 2020 at 02:45:11PM -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> Honestly, I think we've spent plenty of time on this already. I don't
> see a problem with each module having its own certificate(s) - that
> makes them more self-contained - nor any great need to have the targets
> named the same.
Yeah, I don't see much point in combining both of them as those
modules have different assumptions behind the files built. Now I
agree with Peter's point to use the same Makefile rule names in both
files so as it gets easier to grep for all instances.
So, src/test/ssl/ being the oldest one, ssl_passphrase_callback should
just do s/ssl-files/sslfiles/.
--
Michael
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2020-06-03 05:27:51 | Re: elog(DEBUG2 in SpinLocked section. |
| Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2020-06-03 05:19:10 | Re: SIGSEGV from START_REPLICATION 0/XXXXXXX in XLogSendPhysical () at walsender.c:2762 |