From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.0 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_NONE shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id ABF8B1F46C for ; Wed, 22 Jan 2020 19:20:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728139AbgAVTUb (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 Jan 2020 14:20:31 -0500 Received: from pb-smtp1.pobox.com ([64.147.108.70]:56586 "EHLO pb-smtp1.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726026AbgAVTUb (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 Jan 2020 14:20:31 -0500 Received: from pb-smtp1.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8CCD739F54; Wed, 22 Jan 2020 14:20:28 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=yIbHwKk+53M+S59p/MugTeF+fOM=; b=Wwe1yW xVS+Pk0Hd19RXPVkyQ30X2Ju4zbsV6XG5ewo7bzUwu/26V7v1LlmE2AJLXLQVCAK dbJSzajj7lN8GNdGYXPF7v0dZUH5sM9nZr/y+Y3lBDd6mpiCzX/iaDesTtr4BjQ1 rs0ZQKo+ulYWTgRSjdUtYdc0BjHILtSvdA2ZA= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=bBN1g9HrAkp7svr6uB6CEumXQf/K/krt vdwU7oljKqaDTUqCtAO77JAN5z0X7b9aWiOnXYeZHqUoetUIc7KeajwFEVu0J81B f9i0TTo9I7RovnoRKWq2UlD/sNaNQ5wPrF4haS/Aau33PvS4xcGbwTZCaqX+981T TmlEz0W5hxU= Received: from pb-smtp1.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8402239F53; Wed, 22 Jan 2020 14:20:28 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [34.76.80.147]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D652539F52; Wed, 22 Jan 2020 14:20:27 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: Johannes Schindelin Cc: Nirmal Khedkar , git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Facing error in git-imap-send while compiling Git References: Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2020 11:20:26 -0800 In-Reply-To: (Johannes Schindelin's message of "Tue, 21 Jan 2020 22:09:07 +0100 (CET)") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 3F6A0374-3D4C-11EA-BB05-C28CBED8090B-77302942!pb-smtp1.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Johannes Schindelin writes: >> From my limited knowledge of OpenSSL libraries, I think the error has >> more to do with 'SSL_library_init()' , which appears like a >> constructor to the OpenSSL library. I found these emails regarding >> "if" cases around this function. Please check out these patches: >> 1. Rosen Penev: >> https://lore.kernel.org/git/20181227023548.396-1-rosenp@gmail.com/ > > I remember that one. And I agreed with Junio that the documentation > suggests that the call is _optional_, while the patch suggests that it > would be _incorrect_ instead. > > And looking at > https://www.openssl.org/docs/man1.1.1/man3/SSL_library_init.html suggests > to me that it is still supported. > > Having said that, if I look at the headers installed for `libssl-dev` > version `1.1.1-1ubuntu2.1~18.04.5` in my Ubuntu installation, I see that > `/usr/include/openssl/ssl.h` defines that symbol as: > > # define SSL_library_init() OPENSSL_init_ssl(0, NULL) > > but _only_: > > # if OPENSSL_API_COMPAT < 0x10100000L > > So maybe that disagrees with the documentation that says that > SSL_library_init() is optional? > > The curious thing is that `OPENSSL_API_COMPAT` is not even defined > anywhere. So maybe it _is_ the right thing to also `#define > SSL_library_init() (void)` in the diff you listed above? > > _Maybe_ guarded within `#ifndef SSL_library_init ... #endif` guards? > >> 2. eroen: https://lore.kernel.org/git/20170112104219.563497-1-git-scm@occam.eroen.eu/ > > That sounds like a good suggestion, too. > >> Are the fixes made in these patches relevant here. Please let me know >> if I'm going wrong. > > Yes, both threads are relevant, and if you can reconcile them into a patch > that makes Git compile with OpenSSL v1.1.1, I will try my best to review > them (Cc: me, just in case). I agree with the above reasoning and the suggestion given by Bates in https://lore.kernel.org/git/66967e0e-8bd9-f4b6-d2d4-ccce9004f42e@nottheoilrig.com/ sounds like a reasonable one. Thanks for digging and double-checking these two previous efforts, and giving another round of thoughts on them.