Re: PostgreSQL and OpenSSL 4.0.0

From: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
To: Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL and OpenSSL 4.0.0
Date: 2026-05-26 06:02:50
Message-ID: ahU3irfvsoO5Ul9S@paquier.xyz
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, May 19, 2026 at 02:18:08PM -0700, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
> > On 8 May 2026, at 00:21, Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se> wrote:
>
> > I think the changes are straightforward enough that we can go ahead with them.
> > I'll re-test and re-post a new patchset for all branches once the minors ship.
>
> Attached are rebased versions of this patchset for v14-master.

I have a question here. Most of the changes relate to the use of const
where the OpenSSL APIs require these to be so, but why is this a new
requirement for 4.0? I can see that for most of the upstream
routines, the const changes are much older, like in 8cc86b81ac20 for
X509_NAME_get_text_by_NID() applying down to branch openssl-3.0.
--
Michael

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message jian he 2026-05-26 06:05:08 Re: Fix bug of CHECK constraint enforceability recursion
Previous Message Shlok Kyal 2026-05-26 06:00:12 Re: Support EXCEPT for ALL SEQUENCES publications