>
> On Tue, 24 Feb 1998, Jan Wieck wrote:
>
> > CREATE TABLE xpg_usr (
> > usename name,
> > usesysid int4,
> > usecreatedb bool,
> > usetrace bool,
> > usesuper bool,
> > usecatupd bool,
> > passwd text,
> > valuntil abstime);
> >
> > UPDATE pg_class SET relname = 'pg_usr'
> > WHERE relname = 'xpg_usr';
> >
> > CREATE RULE _RETpg_usr AS ON SELECT TO pg_usr
> > DO INSTEAD
> > SELECT usename, usesysid, usecreatedb,
> > usetrace, usesuper, usecatupd,
> > '********'::text as passwd, valuntil
> > FROM pg_user;
> >
> > REVOKE ALL ON pg_user FROM public;
>
> Okay, just so that I don't mess things up in the translation...do
> you want to send me an appropriate patch for this?
>
> > > But as it was done in most UN*X's, could we rename the
> > > pg_user containing the password into pg_shadow and then
> > > create a view pg_user that just stars out the password field?
> > > This way no existing application code (not even the JDBC
> > > etc.) needs any changes, except for the createuser etc.
> > > tools that always get installed with the new release.
> >
> > Still vote for this. And as soon as we finally choose one
> > name for the public pg_user view we must fix createuser.sh,
> > createdb.sh and so on to make their checks on the public
> > accessible view so they still print the proper error messages
> > instead of
>
> No arguments here...can you include this as part of your patch
> too?
Will do so.
Jan
--
#======================================================================#
# It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong than for being right. #
# Let's break this rule - forgive me. #
#======================================== jwieck@debis.com (Jan Wieck) #
