> On 21 Jun 2023, at 07:44, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote:
> On 2023-06-21 11:53:44 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> I have been annoyed by these in the past when doing backpatches, as
>> this creates some noise, and the only place where this counts is
>> sha2_openssl.c. Thoughts about doing something like the attached for
>> ~13?
>
> Wouldn't the proper fix be to backpatch 4d3db13621b?
Agreed, I'd be more inclined to go with OPENSSL_API_COMPAT. If we still get
warnings with that set then I feel those warrant special consideration rather
than a blanket suppression.
--
Daniel Gustafsson