> On 29/09/2021, at 2:33 AM, Daniel Gustafsson <dan...@yesql.se> wrote: > >> On 28 Sep 2021, at 05:15, Daniel Fone <dan...@fone.net.nz> wrote: >> >>> On 26/09/2021, at 12:09 AM, Daniel Gustafsson <dan...@yesql.se> wrote: >>> >>> Upgrading our crypt_blowfish.c to the upstream 1.3 version would be the >>> correct >>> fix IMO, but since we have a few local modifications it's not a drop-in. I >>> don't think it would be too hairy, but one needs to be very careful when >>> dealing with crypto. >> >> My C experience is limited, but I can make an initial attempt if the effort >> would be worthwhile. Is this realistically a patch that a newcomer to the >> codebase should attempt? > > I don't see why not, the best first patches are those scratching an itch. If > you feel up for it then give it a go, I - and the rest of pgsql-hackers - can > help if you need to bounce ideas.
I’m glad you said that. I couldn’t resist trying and have attached a patch. By referencing the respective git logs, I didn’t have too much difficulty identifying the material changes in each codebase. I’ve documented all the postgres-specific changes to upstream in the header comment for each file. Daniel
0001-Merge-upstream-crypt_blowfish-1.3.patch
Description: Binary data
