Hi Umar,
thanks for taking a look and pointing to the documentation.
While it is good that this behavior is noted in the documentation, the issues mentioned in my proposal still stand:
- The warning itself does not indicate that the "passfile" is ignored. Of course users can and hopefully will eventually look at the documentation, but the behavior is not self-explanatory nor intuitive (even though it could be). Reality is, that most users do not read the documentation for each directive they use to the very end. As libpg is used in many other software products, users consulting the Postgres documentation specifically is less common. I really don't want to defend the user potentially being negligent - I am saying that the current behavior has no/minimal use and could be more intuitive to spare users time.
- While the documentation addresses one or two peripheral issues I mentioned, it does not address the fundamental issue, that the current behavior is not useful / in the users interest.
- Not being able to use group permissions is also still a prohibitive constraint.
I'll also include the gist of the patch here as it is a 2-3 line change:
- fclose(fp);
- return NULL;
Kind regards
Paul Ohlhauser
PS: I changed my email address in the mailing list, hope that's not an issue.
