Bruce Momjian writes:
> The attached patch checks for the file, and either user it or generates
> a log message that it was skipped.
I still can't get excited about this. Who will it help? The DBA who is
silly enough to think his ancient SSL library supports CRL is probably
also silly enough no
Tom Lane wrote:
> Kris Jurka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > On Thu, 4 May 2006, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> Don't try to compile SSL CRL support if local SSL installation hasn't
> >> got it. Per buildfarm failure on 'canary'.
>
> > It seems a little bit dangerous to just not check the CRL without so mu
