Hi guys, On Tue, Jan 22, 2019 at 03:22:38PM +0100, Emeric Brun wrote: > I think you can merge this.
OK. I still find it very fragile in that we usually don't make a difference between an absent define and the same declared as zero, and most SSL_OP_* entries are defined this way in ssl_sock.c, but I don't see that many other options here. I think that the #ifndef at least deserves a comment indicating that it may also match a zero value to detect safe implementations so that we are not tempted later to refactor this and break BoringSSL. We can also add a Reported-By to ack Adam's original work on the issue. Just let me know if I need to adjust it myself or if anyone wants to take care of it. Thanks, Willy
