On Thu, 19 Oct 2017, Gert Doering wrote: > Hi, > > On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 09:43:41AM +1100, Damien Miller wrote: > > You've got this exactly backwards. We don't want a shim that allows > > OpenSSL-1.1 to present a OpenSSL-1.0 API. We want a shim that allows > > us to use the OpenSSL-1.1 API when using OpenSSL-1.0, so we don't have > > to maintain a forest of #ifdefs. > > For obvious reasons this shim cannot exist. If the structure member is > not visible anymore (and might not actually look the way you think it > does), you cannot provide structure definitons that magically give you > access to the members again. You might want to read what I wrote again, because you've got it backwards too: "We want a shim that allows us to use the ***OpenSSL-1.1 API*** when using OpenSSL-1.0" The OpenSSL 1.1 API is the one with the opaque structures, so there's no intrinsic problem implementing it for the 1.0 library, which doesn't. _______________________________________________ openssh-unix-dev mailing list openssh-unix-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.mindrot.org/mailman/listinfo/openssh-unix-dev
