Re: OpenSSL 3.0.0 compatibility

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: OpenSSL 3.0.0 compatibility
Date: 2020-07-07 17:45:58
Message-ID: 6b13734e-486c-5025-c645-1c7b1a738178@2ndquadrant.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2020-05-30 11:29, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> My proposal would be to introduce OPENSSL_API_COMPAT=10001 into master
> after the 13/14 branching, along with any other changes to make it
> compile cleanly against OpenSSL 3.0.0. Once that has survived some
> scrutiny from the buildfarm and also from folks building against
> LibreSSL etc., it should probably be backpatched into PG13. In the
> immediate future, I wouldn't bother about the older branches (<=PG12) at
> all. As long as they still compile, users can just disable deprecation
> warnings, and we may add some patches to that effect at some point, but
> it's not like OpenSSL 3.0.0 will be adopted into production builds any
> time soon.

Trying to move this along, where would be a good place to define
OPENSSL_API_COMPAT? The only place that's shared between frontend and
backend code is c.h. The attached patch does it that way.

--
Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

Attachment Content-Type Size
0001-Define-OPENSSL_API_COMPAT.patch text/plain 1.1 KB

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Alvaro Herrera 2020-07-07 17:46:17 Re: SIGSEGV from START_REPLICATION 0/XXXXXXX in XLogSendPhysical () at walsender.c:2762
Previous Message Andres Freund 2020-07-07 17:12:16 Re: Default setting for enable_hashagg_disk (hash_mem)