On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 02:00:00PM +0100, Dmitry Dolgov wrote:
> Unfortunately, patch needs to be fixed - it doesn't pass "make -C ssl check"
>
> t/001_ssltests.pl .. 1/65 Bailout called. Further testing stopped:
> system pg_ctl failed
> FAILED--Further testing stopped: system pg_ctl failed
>
>
> On Sun, Oct 28, 2018 at 11:42 PM Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
>
> > On 26 Sep 2018, at 23:19, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
>
> > I’ve rebased these changes on top of your v9 patch as the attached v10.
>
> Attached is a v11 rebased on top of todays HEAD, which had minor conflicts due
> to the recent snp
On 02/10/2018 15:40, Tom Lane wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut writes:
>> On 26/09/2018 23:19, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
>>> It’s not clear to me just how common it is to use GCC via homebrew on macOS.
>
>> I use that all the time.
>
> Hm, so did 5e2217131 break anything for you? Does that version of g
Peter Eisentraut writes:
> On 26/09/2018 23:19, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
>> It’s not clear to me just how common it is to use GCC via homebrew on macOS.
> I use that all the time.
Hm, so did 5e2217131 break anything for you? Does that version of gcc
claim to know -F or -framework switches?
On 26/09/2018 23:19, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
> It’s not clear to me just how common it is to use GCC via homebrew on macOS.
I use that all the time.
--
Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
Heikki Linnakangas writes:
> On 27/06/18 21:57, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
>> Courtesy of the ever-present Murphy I managed to forget some testcode in
>> src/backend/Makefile which broke compilation for builds without secure
>> transport, attached v8 patch fixes that.
> I've read through this patch
On 27/06/18 21:57, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
On 27 Jun 2018, at 14:32, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
Attached is an updated patch for supporting the native macOS Secure Transport
library, rebased on top of current master.
Courtesy of the ever-present Murphy I managed to forget some testcode in
sr
> On 06 Mar 2018, at 22:08, Tom Lane wrote:
>
> Peter Eisentraut writes:
>> On 3/4/18 17:15, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
>>> Do I think this patch is realistic to target for v11? Well. Given where we
>>> are in the cycle, I don’t think any new TLS implementation going in is
>>> realistic at this
Peter Eisentraut writes:
> On 3/4/18 17:15, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
>> Do I think this patch is realistic to target for v11? Well. Given where we
>> are in the cycle, I don’t think any new TLS implementation going in is
>> realistic at this point since none of the proposed ones have had enough
On 3/4/18 17:15, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
> Do I think this patch is realistic to target for v11? Well. Given where we
> are in the cycle, I don’t think any new TLS implementation going in is
> realistic at this point since none of the proposed ones have had enough tyre
> kicking done. That migh
On 2018-03-05 10:41:01 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> > If no new TLS library is supported in v11, we still got cleaner SSL support
> > out
> > of it due to the work performed to further remove our dependency on
> > OpenSSL, so
> > we still come out on top IMO. Thanks Peter et.al!
>
> I am defi
> On 05 Mar 2018, at 02:41, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 04, 2018 at 11:15:58PM +0100, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
>> If no new TLS library is supported in v11, we still got cleaner SSL support
>> out
>> of it due to the work performed to further remove our dependency on OpenSSL,
>> so
>>
On Sun, Mar 04, 2018 at 11:15:58PM +0100, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
> Commitfest Status
> =
> Do I think this patch is realistic to target for v11? Well. Given where we
> are in the cycle, I don’t think any new TLS implementation going in is
> realistic at this point since none of
> On 02 Mar 2018, at 03:10, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2018-01-26 23:30:08 +0100, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
>> And another rebase and update after the refactoring in c1869542b3a4da4b12ca.
>> Also fixed some typos in comments. The other patches originally posted in
>> this
>> patchset are either co
> On 02 Mar 2018, at 10:10, Andres Freund wrote:
>
> On 2018-01-26 23:30:08 +0100, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
>> And another rebase and update after the refactoring in c1869542b3a4da4b12ca.
>> Also fixed some typos in comments. The other patches originally posted in
>> this
>> patchset are either
Hi,
On 2018-01-26 23:30:08 +0100, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
> And another rebase and update after the refactoring in c1869542b3a4da4b12ca.
> Also fixed some typos in comments. The other patches originally posted in
> this
> patchset are either committed or made redundant.
Could you provide a qui
On 1/23/18 16:18, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
>> The change is
>>
>> - 'psql', '-X', '-A', '-t', '-c', "SELECT 'connected with $connstr'",
>> + 'psql', '-X', '-A', '-t', '-c', "SELECT \$\$connected with $connstr\$\$",
>>
>> So the problem must have been a single quote in the connstr.
> Right, looking
> On 23 Jan 2018, at 22:04, Peter Eisentraut
> wrote:
>
> On 1/23/18 14:59, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
>> It’s not specific to the implementation per se, but it increases the
>> likelyhood
>> of hitting it. In order to load certificates from Keychains the cert common
>> name must be specified in
On 1/23/18 14:59, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
> It’s not specific to the implementation per se, but it increases the
> likelyhood
> of hitting it. In order to load certificates from Keychains the cert common
> name must be specified in the connstr, when importing the testfiles into
> keychains I ran
> On 23 Jan 2018, at 18:20, Peter Eisentraut
> wrote:
>
> On 1/21/18 18:08, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
>> As per before, my patch for running tests against another set of binaries is
>> included as well as a fix for connstrings with spaces, but with the recent
>> hacking by Peter I assume this is
On 1/21/18 18:08, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
> As per before, my patch for running tests against another set of binaries is
> included as well as a fix for connstrings with spaces, but with the recent
> hacking by Peter I assume this is superfluous. It was handy for development
> so
> I’ve kept it
On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 12:08:03AM +0100, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
> The attached patchset rebases Secure Transport support over HEAD and adds stub
> functions for that the SCRAM support added to make everything compile and run
> the SSL testsuite. There are no new features or bugfixes over the pr
On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 11:35 AM, Michael Paquier
wrote:
> The last set of patches available here does not apply:
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/b5e2b87d-3e8a-4597-9a7f-8489b3b67...@yesql.se
> The SSL test refactoring is one cause. I think as well that this is
> crashing when attempting t
On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 9:46 AM, Michael Paquier
wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 6:21 AM, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
>> I think the intended use case of the GUC should drive the decision on
>> fallback.
>> If the GUC isn’t supposed to be a way to figure out if the server was built
>> with SSL sup
24 matches
Mail list logo
