Could be a rounding issue. What happens if you try this instead:?
eval_pv((safe_version <= 2.08 ? safe_bad : safe_ok), FALSE);
Alternatively, what happens if we make safe_version a double rather than
a float?
(If nothing else works we might have to fall back on a lexical comparison)
cheers
andrew
Mark Kirkwood wrote:
> It seems that the check in src/pl/plperl/plperl.c
>
> eval_pv((safe_version < 2.09 ? safe_bad : safe_ok), FALSE);
>
> is not working quite as expected (CVS HEAD from today):
>
> I have Safe.pm at version 2.09, yet any plperl function I run fails
> with :
>
> ERROR: error from function: trusted perl functions disabled - please
> upgrade perl Safe module to at least 2.09 at (eval 4) line 1.
>
> Just to be sure I amended the test code to :
>
> elog(INFO, "Safe version = %f", safe_version);
> eval_pv((safe_version < 2.09 ? safe_bad : safe_ok), FALSE);
>
> and I see :
>
> INFO: Safe version = 2.090000
>
> (Followed by the error)
>
> I confess some puzzlement - as the code *looks* like it should work!
> The platform is Linux 2.4.22 glibc 2.3.2, perl 5.8.0 (Patched Redhat 9)
>
> regards
>
> Mark
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
> subscribe-nomail command to majordomo@postgresql.org so that your
> message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
>
