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

From: Jacob Champion <jacob(dot)champion(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
To: Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se>
Cc: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>, Postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, mikael(dot)kjellstrom(at)gmail(dot)com
Subject: Re: Cutting support for OpenSSL 1.0.1 and 1.0.2 in 17~?
Date: 2024-04-06 00:14:51
Message-ID: CAOYmi+=+Nbj-0o3Ddah6QyQB3i5f+k7KUStwHzb3HY_O1twovA@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, Apr 5, 2024 at 3:32 PM Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se> wrote:
> > An autoreconf run on my machine pulls in more changes (getting rid of
> > the symbols we no longer check for).
>
> Ah yes, missed updating before formatting the patch. Done in the attached.

The commit subject may still need to be reverted to how you had it
originally, unless you are keeping my omission of "1.1.0" on purpose.

I've tested (with Meson) on LibreSSL 3.3 to 3.8, and verified that 2.7
to 3.2 now fail to configure. Similarly, OpenSSL 1.0.2 and 1.1.0 fail
to configure, and I ran tests with 1.1.1 to 3.3. I did a quick smoke
test with autoconf to make sure that old versions are rejected there
too, but I didn't run all the tests again.

Maybe there was a good reason for them to do it, but I'm kind of
amazed that LibreSSL camped on the 2.x version number, then revved to
a 3.x line anyway and camped on those numbers too, so that Meson can't
just rely on pkgconfig to figure out which version we have.

--Jacob

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Michael Paquier 2024-04-06 00:16:25 Re: IPC::Run::time[r|out] vs our TAP tests
Previous Message Michael Paquier 2024-04-06 00:13:42 Re: Security lessons from liblzma