On Sun, Mar 04 2018, Gert Doering <g...@greenie.muc.de> wrote: [...]
> "Please note that LibreSSL is not a supported crypto backend. We > accept patches and we do test on OpenBSD 6.0 which comes with > LibreSSL, but if newer versions of LibreSSL break API compatibility > we do not take responsibility to fix that." > > > I think a patch adding these LIBRESSL_VERSION checks has a reasonable > chance of being ACKed and merged :-) - but LibreSSL support stuff has > to come from some who cares, so Steffan or Antonio are not going to > go out and check patches for "will it break LibreSSL?"... I don't think adding "&& !defined(LIBRESSL_VERSION_NUMBER)" in more places would be a good idea. Those checks would do more harm than good in the long run, preventing the use of new interfaces when they get implemented by LibreSSL. Better use function availability checks IMHO. -- jca | PGP : 0x1524E7EE / 5135 92C1 AD36 5293 2BDF DDCC 0DFA 74AE 1524 E7EE
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________ Openvpn-devel mailing list Openvpn-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/openvpn-devel
