On Sun, Mar 31, 2024 at 9:59 AM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com> writes:
> > I was reminded of this thread by ambient security paranoia. As it
> > stands, we require 1.0.2 (but we very much hope that package
> > maintainers and others in control of builds don't decide to use it).
> > Should we skip 1.1.1 and move to requiring 3 for v17?
>
> I'd be kind of sad if I couldn't test SSL stuff anymore on my
> primary workstation, which has
>
> $ rpm -q openssl
> openssl-1.1.1k-12.el8_9.x86_64
>
> I think it's probably true that <=1.0.2 is not in any distro that
> we still need to pay attention to, but I reject the contention
> that RHEL8 is not in that set.
Hmm, OK so it doesn't have 3 available in parallel from base repos.
But it's also about to reach end of "full support" in 2 months[1], so
if we applied the policies we discussed in the LLVM-vacuuming thread
(to wit: build farm - EOL'd OSes), then... One question I'm unclear
on is whether v17 will be packaged for RHEL8.
[1] https://access.redhat.com/product-life-cycles?product=Red%20Hat%20Enterprise%20Linux