> On 21 Jun 2023, at 07:44, Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> wrote: > On 2023-06-21 11:53:44 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> I have been annoyed by these in the past when doing backpatches, as >> this creates some noise, and the only place where this counts is >> sha2_openssl.c. Thoughts about doing something like the attached for >> ~13? > > Wouldn't the proper fix be to backpatch 4d3db13621b? Agreed, I'd be more inclined to go with OPENSSL_API_COMPAT. If we still get warnings with that set then I feel those warrant special consideration rather than a blanket suppression. -- Daniel Gustafsson
