Re: OpenSSL 3.0.0 compatibility - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Peter Eisentraut
Subject Re: OpenSSL 3.0.0 compatibility
Date
Msg-id 6b13734e-486c-5025-c645-1c7b1a738178@2ndquadrant.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: OpenSSL 3.0.0 compatibility  (Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>)
Responses Re: OpenSSL 3.0.0 compatibility
Re: OpenSSL 3.0.0 compatibility
List 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

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Andres Freund
Date:
Subject: Re: Default setting for enable_hashagg_disk (hash_mem)
Next
From: Alvaro Herrera
Date:
Subject: Re: SIGSEGV from START_REPLICATION 0/XXXXXXX in XLogSendPhysical () at walsender.c:2762