Re: remove internal support in pgcrypto?
От | Peter Eisentraut |
---|---|
Тема | Re: remove internal support in pgcrypto? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 146fe524-646a-c335-7c7f-6025bedc25fc@enterprisedb.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: remove internal support in pgcrypto? (Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se>) |
Ответы |
Re: remove internal support in pgcrypto?
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 03.11.21 11:16, Daniel Gustafsson wrote: >> On 30 Oct 2021, at 14:11, Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@enterprisedb.com> wrote: >> >> On 24.08.21 11:13, Peter Eisentraut wrote: >>> So I'm tempted to suggest that we remove the built-in, non-OpenSSL cipher and hash implementations in pgcrypto (basicallyINT_SRCS in pgcrypto/Makefile), and then also pursue the simplifications in the OpenSSL code paths described in[0]. >> >> Here is a patch for this. > > This patch doesn't work on Windows, which I think is because it pulls in > pgcrypto even in builds without OpenSSL. Poking at that led me to realize that > we can simplify even more with this. The conditonal source includes can go > away and be replaced with a simple OBJS clause, and with that the special hacks > in Mkvcbuild.pm to overcome that. > > Attached is a diff on top of your patch to do the above. I haven't tested it > on Windows yet, but if you think it's in the right direction we'll take it for > a spin in a CI with/without OpenSSL. Here is a consolidated patch. I have tested it locally, so it should be okay on Windows. > Now, *if* we merge the NSS patch this does introduce special cases again which > this rips out. I prefer to try and fix them in that patch to keep avoiding the > need for them rather than keep them on speculation for a patch which hasn't > been decided on. Okay, I wasn't sure about the preferred way forward here. I'm content with the approach you have chosen.
Вложения
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: