Re: OpenSSL 1.1 breaks configure and more

From: Andreas Karlsson <andreas(at)proxel(dot)se>
To: Christoph Berg <myon(at)debian(dot)org>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Subject: Re: OpenSSL 1.1 breaks configure and more
Date: 2016-06-27 18:21:35
Message-ID: c44c23af-c003-523b-a987-6c79349dee4c@proxel.se
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 06/27/2016 08:12 PM, Christoph Berg wrote:
> Re: Andreas Karlsson 2016-06-27 <8a0a5959-0b83-3dc8-d9e7-66ce8c1c5bc7(at)proxel(dot)se>
>>> The errors you report make it sound like they broke API compatibility
>>> wholesale. Was that really their intent? If so, where are the changes
>>> documented?
>>
>> I do not see that they have documented the removal of the SSL_library_init
>> symbol anywhere. They changed the function into a macro in the following
>> commit. I guess we have to check for some other symbol, like SSL_new.
>
> I'm not an autoconf expert, but as said in the original mail, I could
> get the SSL_library_init check to work, even if that's a macro now:

Yes, we could do that, but I do not think we should check for the
existence of a backwards compatibility macro. Actually I think we may
want to skip much of the OpenSSL initialization code when compiling
against OpenSSL 1.1 since they have now added automatic initialization
of the library. Instead I think we should check for something we
actually will use like SSL_CTX_new().

Andreas

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Christoph Berg 2016-06-27 18:22:56 Re: Broken handling of lwlocknames.h
Previous Message Christoph Berg 2016-06-27 18:12:12 Re: OpenSSL 1.1 breaks configure and more