This is a discussion on Re: IPv6 support in openssl's BIO - Openssl ; On Thu, Jul 13, 2006 at 02:08:22PM +0200, Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker wrote: > > Note that they are documented by being declared in bio.h. The OpenSSL OK. > documentation in form of .pod files isn't complete yet. > ...
On Thu, Jul 13, 2006 at 02:08:22PM +0200, Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker wrote:
> Note that they are documented by being declared in bio.h. The OpenSSL
> documentation in form of .pod files isn't complete yet.
> The best thing to do with functions that you want removed is to wrap
> them in a #ifndef OPENSSL_NO_DEPRECATED clause. If you look, you will
> see that we've already done that with some functions.
> jpr-ossl> That's why I asked about the opinion about them -- are they
> jpr-ossl> needed, are they wanted, what exactly whould they do ... ?
> The relevant question is "are they used". If we're doing something
> that forces others to rewrite or tweak their applications, we need to
> give them ample warning if we can.
OK. I suggest I prepare a patch that will not change them (they will
be IPv4-only), will mark them with #ifndef OPENSSL_NO_DEPRECATED, and
will not add them to the .pod. Sounds reasonable?
How about the problem of BIO_set_conn_ip/BIO_get_conn_ip being
IPv4-only? Do you prefer BIO_set_conn_ipv6/BIO_get_conn_ipv6 as their
IPv6-only counterparts, or some other way? How heavily is BIO_* used
and how heavily are BIO_set_conn_ip/BIO_get_conn_ip used?
And a third question -- the apps/*.c seem to use BIO_* for some tasks,
but some other things they duplicate -- the name resolving and socket
setup being a good example. Is there a plan (or a distant future
target) to have apps/*.c fully use BIO_*?
I ask these questions to make sure I understand plans of the OpenSSL
Team well and that the patches I'm going to prepare will have
reasonable chance to be included in the core openssl.
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
Development Mailing List firstname.lastname@example.org
Automated List Manager email@example.com