[resending as plain text since the original message bounced from the list.] Yes, the patch is necessary to avoid problems with later revisions of BoringSSL. But the aim was not to break older OpenSSLs, so it's possible some detail was wrong. Can you please provide the OpenSSL version and the compile error? On Wed, Nov 16, 2022 at 12:28 PM Ben Greear <greearb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Hello David, > > This patch is breaking compile on Fedora-24 and earlier (due to older openssl). > > Does this patch actually help anything, or is it just code cleanup? > > commit faf9c04cb51c9c1b5f2a4599c57e6ba44f6d2428 > Author: David Benjamin <davidben@xxxxxxxxxx> > Date: Mon Jun 13 12:22:05 2022 -0400 > > Remove a host of unnecessary OPENSSL_IS_BORINGSSL ifdefs > > The <openssl/buf.h> include is relevant in both OpenSSL and BoringSSL > because the file uses BUF_MEM (include what you use). OpenSSL just > happened to include it via another file. OpenSSL also spells it > <openssl/buffer.h>, not matching the type, so use the compatible > spelling. > > Additionally all the CHECKED_CAST and manual STACK_OF(T) definitions > call into BoringSSL internals. The correct, public APIs are simply to > just use the same code as OpenSSL and call the DEFINE_STACK_OF macros. > > Signed-off-by: David Benjamin <davidben@xxxxxxxxxx> > > Thanks, > Ben > > -- > Ben Greear <greearb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Candela Technologies Inc http://www.candelatech.com > _______________________________________________ Hostap mailing list Hostap@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/hostap
