[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       ceph-users
Subject:    [ceph-users] Re: OpenSSL in librados
From:       Casey Bodley <cbodley () redhat ! com>
Date:       2023-02-26 15:02:11
Message-ID: CAF-p1-K37WU17T0AHQDmXtk-DW0R5Ws2N=hAG6RzkE5OmrmPXw () mail ! gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

On Sun, Feb 26, 2023 at 8:20 AM Ilya Dryomov <idryomov@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> On Sun, Feb 26, 2023 at 2:15 PM Patrick Schlangen <patrick@schlangen.me> wrote:
> > 
> > Hi Ilya,
> > 
> > > Am 26.02.2023 um 14:05 schrieb Ilya Dryomov <idryomov@gmail.com>:
> > > 
> > > Isn't OpenSSL 1.0 long out of support?  I'm not sure if extending
> > > librados API to support a workaround for something that went EOL over
> > > three years ago is worth it.
> > 
> > fair point. However, as long as ceph still supports compiling against OpenSSL 1.0 \
> > and has special code paths to initialize OpenSSL for versions <= 1.0, I think \
> > this should be fixed. The other option would be to remove OpenSSL 1.0 support \
> > completely. 
> > What do you think?
> 
> Removing OpenSSL 1.0 support is fine with me but it would need a wider
> discussion.  I'm CCing the development list.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Ilya
> _______________________________________________
> ceph-users mailing list -- ceph-users@ceph.io
> To unsubscribe send an email to ceph-users-leave@ceph.io
> 

if librados still works with openssl 1.0 when you're not using it
elsewhere in the process, i don't see a compelling reason to break
that. maybe just add a #warning about it to librados.h?
_______________________________________________
ceph-users mailing list -- ceph-users@ceph.io
To unsubscribe send an email to ceph-users-leave@ceph.io


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]