Personnally,
and although I am not at all a M$ fan, really not at all,
I would not consider XP or any win32-like platform since XP as "outdated",
as, finally, what openssl needs from the platform ?
some standard-C lib, bsd-like sockets, and some (a very few) posix
services or equivalents.
Some things that, for example, even Windows CE 5.0 is providing (and I
will again send a quite small patch to have full support of WCE 5/ WM6
in the near future).
Since 1995, winsock2 and CRT lib or MT lib are quite stable on win32
platforms: so I would not see any reason to support, eg, w8 and not XP.
Openssl is not even (certified as) MT-safe...while it could be (with
some code adaptation), even on win32 platforms (that offer more or less
all the minimum services for that, as in unices/linuxes).
And when I see the very big list of supported platforms with vms or
obscure unices flavors, I would not understand that win32 platforms
since XP be claimed as outdated or unsupported.
I would add that, of course, openssl is even more needed on platforms
that are lacking security support by their own manufacturers.
But it is not because a platform is not "officially supported" by M$ or
any other manufacturer, that it is outdated (I mean : "unused in the
real world"),
it is (or should be) just ....the contrary : it is because something is
never used any more anywhere that it can be considered as outdated...and
then may not need anymore support...
I would add that, in very particular cases, some platform that are
rarely used, may still be supported by openssl team, or at least community,
just for the memory of the project and the maintaining of some
skills...and the consistency of the code :
going to un-support some platform SHOULD lead to REMOVE some code : this
can dangeroulsy have many side effects...
I appreciate that Rich Salz is deeply diving into old RT patches or bug
reports,
and we have all to help in that sense:
but removing bug reports from the RT-list is one thing,
removing any #ifdef in the code and/or "official" support for some
platform is another thing that I would not recommend before old
RT-reports (> 5 years) have been cleared/clarified by Rich and others.
I would add a probably very stupid question : as I mentioned earlier,
openssl is "just" using very common services from the platform
(compilation platform + runtime platform),
that are very common on many platforms for years, so that I do not
clearly understand why openssl team supports so many versions of openssl
: 0.9.8 1.0.0 1.0.1 1.0.2 1.1.x ...a to z...(fips is something else I
know that...)
Is there any runtime platform that can run 0.9.8 without being able to
run 1.0.2 ?...strange to me.
For me this sounds more dispersive than platform support.
What I mean is that I would better understand devteam to "push" people
to use only the latest or last two versions of openssl,
rather than pushing some platform out of support, out of the code...
...unless...openssl team receives funds to maintain such 0.9.x versions
by some "customers", something that I can understand.
Regards
Pierre
Le 01/07/2014 07:52, Zoltan Arpadffy a écrit :
Hi,
I see that Rich is doing a fantastic job by cleaning up the backlog...
I absolutely agree that very old releases cannot be supported, but what about
the platforms?
I thought until now, that as long there are developers who are willing to
develop for a certain platform and there is some community interest in using
that - the platform will be supported as odd might it be in the Windows and
Linux dominated World.
I just started to wonder, will soon come the time when my patches will be also refused with the "unsupported platform" comment?
Thank you.
Regards,
Z
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-openssl-...@openssl.org [mailto:owner-openssl-...@openssl.org] On
Behalf Of Rich Salz via RT
Sent: den 30 juni 2014 23:43
To: pwal...@au1.ibm.com
Cc: openssl-dev@openssl.org
Subject: [openssl.org #1610] OS400 patches
Very old release, unsupported platform. Closing ticket. G'day, mate.
______________________________________________________________________
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
Development Mailing List openssl-dev@openssl.org
Automated List Manager majord...@openssl.org
______________________________________________________________________
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
Development Mailing List openssl-dev@openssl.org
Automated List Manager majord...@openssl.org
______________________________________________________________________
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
Development Mailing List openssl-dev@openssl.org
Automated List Manager majord...@openssl.org
