Re: [openssl-dev] Backporting opaque struct getter/setter functions

IANAL, but: 1. Some people see GPL or even LGPL and run away screaming. 1a. Using this means that the using the OpenSSL library requires accepting the LGPL. 1b. Some interpretations of the LGPL permit use when the code is in a dynamically-linked library. Since this is a header file, any code

Re: [openssl-dev] Backporting opaque struct getter/setter functions

On Monday, 7 November 2016 21:26:16 CET Short, Todd wrote: > The file below is LPGL 2.1, and may not be compatible with various projects. > Can it be changed to use the OpenSSL license or equivalent? how LGPL may not be compatible with any project? > -- > -Todd Short > //

Re: [openssl-dev] Backporting opaque struct getter/setter functions

On Thu, Nov 03, 2016 at 03:11:10PM -0500, Benjamin Kaduk wrote: > To revitalize an old thread (quoted below but summarized here), some > applications may desire source-code compatibility between the 1.0.2 API > and the 1.1.0 API. It seems like the sense of the team is that such > accessor

Re: [openssl-dev] Backporting opaque struct getter/setter functions

The file below is LPGL 2.1, and may not be compatible with various projects. Can it be changed to use the OpenSSL license or equivalent? -- -Todd Short // tsh...@akamai.com // "One if by land, two if by sea, three if by the Internet." On Nov 3, 2016, at 4:31 PM, Douglas

Re: [openssl-dev] Backporting opaque struct getter/setter functions

On 11/3/2016 3:11 PM, Benjamin Kaduk wrote: To revitalize an old thread (quoted below but summarized here), some applications may desire source-code compatibility between the 1.0.2 API and the 1.1.0 API.  It seems like the

Re: [openssl-dev] Backporting opaque struct getter/setter functions

I hope that Daniel from CURL will speak up, and perhaps Richard from Qt. I think a new header file, like “openssl110compat.h” or something, hosted in a public repo would be great. We could point to it in the 1.0.2 README, for example. -- Senior Architect, Akamai Technologies Member, OpenSSL

Re: [openssl-dev] Backporting opaque struct getter/setter functions

To revitalize an old thread (quoted below but summarized here), some applications may desire source-code compatibility between the 1.0.2 API and the 1.1.0 API. It seems like the sense of the team is that such accessor functions (or macros) should not be committed into the official 1.0.2 tree, but

Re: [openssl-dev] Backporting opaque struct getter/setter functions

On Po, 2016-01-11 at 01:09 +, Peter Waltenberg wrote: > The point of using accessor FUNCTIONS is that the code doesn't break > if the structure size or offsets of fields in the underlying > structures change across binaries. > > Where that mainly has an impact is updating the crypto/ssl libs

Re: [openssl-dev] Backporting opaque struct getter/setter functions

> On Jan 10, 2016, at 8:09 PM, Peter Waltenberg wrote: > > The point of using accessor FUNCTIONS is that the code doesn't break if the > structure size or offsets of fields in the underlying structures change > across binaries. > > Where that mainly has an impact is

Re: [openssl-dev] Backporting opaque struct getter/setter functions

> On Jan 11, 2016, at 5:23 AM, Tomas Mraz wrote: > > On Po, 2016-01-11 at 01:09 +, Peter Waltenberg wrote: >> The point of using accessor FUNCTIONS is that the code doesn't break >> if the structure size or offsets of fields in the underlying >> structures change across

Re: [openssl-dev] Backporting opaque struct getter/setter functions

On 11/01/16 18:29, Viktor Dukhovni wrote: > >> On Jan 11, 2016, at 5:23 AM, Tomas Mraz wrote: >> >> On Po, 2016-01-11 at 01:09 +, Peter Waltenberg wrote: >>> The point of using accessor FUNCTIONS is that the code doesn't break >>> if the structure size or offsets of

[openssl-dev] Backporting opaque struct getter/setter functions

With OpenSSL 1.1.0 opaquing most of the structs getter/setter functions are required to perform many operations. What do people think about backporting those accessors into the 1.0.2 branch? It might simplify supporting 1.1.0 (but only as projects drop 0.9.8/1.0.0/1.0.1 support of course).

Re: [openssl-dev] Backporting opaque struct getter/setter functions

> required to perform many operations. What do people think about > backporting those accessors into the 1.0.2 branch? Another possibility is to have a just a single (new) header file that has #define's for the accessors that turn into raw structure access.

Re: [openssl-dev] Backporting opaque struct getter/setter functions

On 9 January 2016 at 22:45, Salz, Rich wrote: > > > required to perform many operations. What do people think about > > backporting those accessors into the 1.0.2 branch? > > Another possibility is to have a just a single (new) header file that has > #define's for the accessors