Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1ioe7P-0002vJ-8F for pgsql-committers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Tue, 07 Jan 2020 01:57:15 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1ioe7O-00037c-3Y for pgsql-committers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Tue, 07 Jan 2020 01:57:14 +0000 Received: from makus.postgresql.org ([2001:4800:3e1:1::229]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1ioe7N-00037V-P9 for pgsql-committers@lists.postgresql.org; Tue, 07 Jan 2020 01:57:13 +0000 Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us ([66.207.139.130]) by makus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1ioe7L-0003gX-MG for pgsql-committers@lists.postgresql.org; Tue, 07 Jan 2020 01:57:12 +0000 Received: from sss1.sss.pgh.pa.us (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id 0071v9uI007266; Mon, 6 Jan 2020 20:57:09 -0500 From: Tom Lane To: Michael Paquier cc: pgsql-committers@lists.postgresql.org Subject: Re: pgsql: Remove support for OpenSSL 0.9.8 and 1.0.0 In-reply-to: <20200107014423.GE2386@paquier.xyz> References: <20200106045858.GJ3598@paquier.xyz> <18698.1578287190@sss.pgh.pa.us> <31057.1578341305@sss.pgh.pa.us> <1899.1578356089@sss.pgh.pa.us> <20200107014423.GE2386@paquier.xyz> Comments: In-reply-to Michael Paquier message dated "Tue, 07 Jan 2020 10:44:23 +0900" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <7264.1578362229.1@sss.pgh.pa.us> Date: Mon, 06 Jan 2020 20:57:09 -0500 Message-ID: <7265.1578362229@sss.pgh.pa.us> List-Id: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Owner: List-Archive: Precedence: bulk Michael Paquier writes: > On Mon, Jan 06, 2020 at 07:14:49PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: >> I propose the attached, which removes the unnecessary entries >> and puts full control of the IPv4/IPv6 decision in one place >> (well, two places). The test will still always connect over IPv4, >> but at least there's now a clear route to changing that if >> someone wants to. > Looks sane to me. Thanks for the fix! Pushed, thanks for reviewing! regards, tom lane