Re: [Nmh-workers] Starting the final call for features for 1.7

[Christian Neukirchen]

Tom Lane <address@hidden> writes:

> Ken Hornstein <address@hidden> writes:
>>> Idly, http://www.libressl.org/ is one alternative, aiming to improve the 
>>> code
>>> quality amongst other things.  It includes a new libtls "designed to
>>> make it easier to write foolproof applications" as well as "libssl: a
>>> TLS library, backwards-compatible with OpenSSL".
>
>> Well, I can tell you that's how _I_ want to spend my free time: porting
>> our code to OTHER TLS IMPLEMENTATIONS! :-)
>
> It's worse than that: people will expect you to operate with either one,
> but LibreSSL's "backwards compatible" wrapper is only mostly so.
> Postgres had to give up depending on OPENSSL_VERSION_NUMBER to make
> it work:
> https://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=postgresql.git;a=commitdiff;h=5c6df67e0c961f68e73e7c1e6312211ed59da00a
>
> Somebody will need to test against old openssl, new openssl, *and*
> libressl before you can be confident that you won't be getting complaints
> around this area.  (No, I'm not volunteering.)

For the record, nmh 1.6 --with-tls builds fine against libressl 2.3.7,
no patches required.
(I don't use the TLS features, so I can't tell you if it actually works.)

-- 
Christian Neukirchen  <address@hidden>  http://chneukirchen.org