Re: BUG #13854: SSPI authentication failure: wrong realm name used - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Magnus Hagander
Subject Re: BUG #13854: SSPI authentication failure: wrong realm name used
Date
Msg-id CABUevEzHJH36jhFZV8Hj64dB+dRpZ=NmehMi-V1xbk6MQFF8Pg@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: BUG #13854: SSPI authentication failure: wrong realm name used  (Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 1:38 PM, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> wrote:
On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 11:24 PM, Christian Ullrich <chris@chrullrich.net> wrote:
* Magnus Hagander wrote:

On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 5:09 PM, David Steele <david@pgmasters.net> wrote:

It seems like this patch should be set "ready for committer".  Can one of
the reviewers do that if appropriate?

I'll pick it up to do that as well as committing it.

Ah, good news!

I hope it's not coming too late, but I have a final update removing a rather pointless palloc() return value check. No changes otherwise.

Small notes:

* I think it's wrong to have the docs say "leave this at the default to maintain compatibility" in the reference section - if anything, that's for release notes. And it's the default behaviour. So I just removed that one

* Made some other wordsmithing on the SGML.

* This looks strange to me:
if (!res || p == NULL)

it's correct logically, the style just looks weird. But maybe it's a good idea to keep it to make it clear that res is a bool and p is a pointer. I'm on the fence.

* it also needed a pgindent, in particular a couple of return STATUS_ERROR were indented in a way that made them look like they were almost in the wrong place, and some minor style changes. But that's all mechanical.

Other than those minor things it looks good to me, so I'm going to push the current version with those once I'm back on reliable wifi.



And now committed. Thanks! 

--

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Pierre-Emmanuel André
Date:
Subject: Re: Proposal: BSD Authentication support
Next
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: WIP: Detecting SSI conflicts before reporting constraint violations