Thread: Ticket 298: bug on pg_hba.conf editor
Hi, I worked a bit this morning on this bug. The editor was made in a way that invalid configuration lines are not displayed which is wrong because you can't fix a line if you stored it wrong once. So I did the change to allow the change of an invalid configuration line, and that works well. But I now have many other lines that aren't supposed to appear: # local DATABASE USER METHOD [OPTIONS] # host DATABASE USER ADDRESS METHOD [OPTIONS] # hostssl DATABASE USER ADDRESS METHOD [OPTIONS] # hostnossl DATABASE USER ADDRESS METHOD [OPTIONS] # host name, or it is All are considered comments, and all have a valid first column, so all are displayed. Which is a bit disturbing because they are part of the comments in pg_hba.conf, they are not supposed to be "actual" lines. So, they match our process of identifiying lines, and so they are displayed. Do you have any idea how we could not display these? I mean, I can simply add a check on the line string to see if they are equal to the one of the five strings above, but it seems quite a ugly hack. Or do we simply choose to not care? we prefer to have the bugfix even if it means to show some not "actual" config lines? Another related question: peer, radius are not available in the method. As we are in beta, I won't add them to 1.14 branch, will I? PS: current patch attached. -- Guillaume http://blog.guillaume.lelarge.info http://www.dalibo.com
Attachment
On Sat, Jul 16, 2011 at 1:12 PM, Guillaume Lelarge <guillaume@lelarge.info> wrote: > Hi, > > I worked a bit this morning on this bug. The editor was made in a way > that invalid configuration lines are not displayed which is wrong > because you can't fix a line if you stored it wrong once. > > So I did the change to allow the change of an invalid configuration > line, and that works well. > > But I now have many other lines that aren't supposed to appear: > > # local DATABASE USER METHOD [OPTIONS] > # host DATABASE USER ADDRESS METHOD [OPTIONS] > # hostssl DATABASE USER ADDRESS METHOD [OPTIONS] > # hostnossl DATABASE USER ADDRESS METHOD [OPTIONS] > # host name, or it is > > All are considered comments, and all have a valid first column, so all > are displayed. Which is a bit disturbing because they are part of the > comments in pg_hba.conf, they are not supposed to be "actual" lines. > > So, they match our process of identifiying lines, and so they are > displayed. Do you have any idea how we could not display these? I mean, > I can simply add a check on the line string to see if they are equal to > the one of the five strings above, but it seems quite a ugly hack. Why don't we just ignore anything that starts with a # ? > Or do we simply choose to not care? we prefer to have the bugfix even if > it means to show some not "actual" config lines? Not those. > Another related question: peer, radius are not available in the method. > As we are in beta, I won't add them to 1.14 branch, will I? I would consider their omission to be a bug. -- Dave Page Blog: http://pgsnake.blogspot.com Twitter: @pgsnake EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
On Sat, 2011-07-16 at 21:11 +0100, Dave Page wrote: > On Sat, Jul 16, 2011 at 1:12 PM, Guillaume Lelarge > <guillaume@lelarge.info> wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I worked a bit this morning on this bug. The editor was made in a way > > that invalid configuration lines are not displayed which is wrong > > because you can't fix a line if you stored it wrong once. > > > > So I did the change to allow the change of an invalid configuration > > line, and that works well. > > > > But I now have many other lines that aren't supposed to appear: > > > > # local DATABASE USER METHOD [OPTIONS] > > # host DATABASE USER ADDRESS METHOD [OPTIONS] > > # hostssl DATABASE USER ADDRESS METHOD [OPTIONS] > > # hostnossl DATABASE USER ADDRESS METHOD [OPTIONS] > > # host name, or it is > > > > All are considered comments, and all have a valid first column, so all > > are displayed. Which is a bit disturbing because they are part of the > > comments in pg_hba.conf, they are not supposed to be "actual" lines. > > > > So, they match our process of identifiying lines, and so they are > > displayed. Do you have any idea how we could not display these? I mean, > > I can simply add a check on the line string to see if they are equal to > > the one of the five strings above, but it seems quite a ugly hack. > > Why don't we just ignore anything that starts with a # ? > Because we need to guess which comment is an actual comment and which comment is a disabled configuration. That allows us to hide actual comments, and show disabled configuration. Problem is that our guess is wrong sometimes. > > Or do we simply choose to not care? we prefer to have the bugfix even if > > it means to show some not "actual" config lines? > > Not those. > I don't get it, sorry :) What do you mean by "not those"? > > Another related question: peer, radius are not available in the method. > > As we are in beta, I won't add them to 1.14 branch, will I? > > I would consider their omission to be a bug. > Hmmm, OK. Will fix then. -- Guillaume http://blog.guillaume.lelarge.info http://www.dalibo.com
On Saturday, July 16, 2011, Guillaume Lelarge <guillaume@lelarge.info> wrote: > On Sat, 2011-07-16 at 21:11 +0100, Dave Page wrote: >> On Sat, Jul 16, 2011 at 1:12 PM, Guillaume Lelarge >> <guillaume@lelarge.info> wrote: >> > Hi, >> > >> > I worked a bit this morning on this bug. The editor was made in a way >> > that invalid configuration lines are not displayed which is wrong >> > because you can't fix a line if you stored it wrong once. >> > >> > So I did the change to allow the change of an invalid configuration >> > line, and that works well. >> > >> > But I now have many other lines that aren't supposed to appear: >> > >> > # local DATABASE USER METHOD [OPTIONS] >> > # host DATABASE USER ADDRESS METHOD [OPTIONS] >> > # hostssl DATABASE USER ADDRESS METHOD [OPTIONS] >> > # hostnossl DATABASE USER ADDRESS METHOD [OPTIONS] >> > # host name, or it is >> > >> > All are considered comments, and all have a valid first column, so all >> > are displayed. Which is a bit disturbing because they are part of the >> > comments in pg_hba.conf, they are not supposed to be "actual" lines. >> > >> > So, they match our process of identifiying lines, and so they are >> > displayed. Do you have any idea how we could not display these? I mean, >> > I can simply add a check on the line string to see if they are equal to >> > the one of the five strings above, but it seems quite a ugly hack. >> >> Why don't we just ignore anything that starts with a # ? >> > > Because we need to guess which comment is an actual comment and which > comment is a disabled configuration. That allows us to hide actual > comments, and show disabled configuration. Problem is that our guess is > wrong sometimes. Sounds like you're trying to be too clever. We don't normally care about commented lines in configuration files. If you really want to do so tough, check if a token is wrapped in [ ] - that never happen in a valid configuration I don't believe. >> > Or do we simply choose to not care? we prefer to have the bugfix even if >> > it means to show some not "actual" config lines? >> >> Not those. >> > > I don't get it, sorry :) > > What do you mean by "not those"? We don't want to show those lines. >> > Another related question: peer, radius are not available in the method. >> > As we are in beta, I won't add them to 1.14 branch, will I? >> >> I would consider their omission to be a bug. >> > > Hmmm, OK. Will fix then. Thanks. -- Dave Page Blog: http://pgsnake.blogspot.com Twitter: @pgsnake EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
On Sun, 2011-07-17 at 10:12 +0100, Dave Page wrote: > On Saturday, July 16, 2011, Guillaume Lelarge <guillaume@lelarge.info> wrote: > > On Sat, 2011-07-16 at 21:11 +0100, Dave Page wrote: > >> On Sat, Jul 16, 2011 at 1:12 PM, Guillaume Lelarge > >> <guillaume@lelarge.info> wrote: > >> > Hi, > >> > > >> > I worked a bit this morning on this bug. The editor was made in a way > >> > that invalid configuration lines are not displayed which is wrong > >> > because you can't fix a line if you stored it wrong once. > >> > > >> > So I did the change to allow the change of an invalid configuration > >> > line, and that works well. > >> > > >> > But I now have many other lines that aren't supposed to appear: > >> > > >> > # local DATABASE USER METHOD [OPTIONS] > >> > # host DATABASE USER ADDRESS METHOD [OPTIONS] > >> > # hostssl DATABASE USER ADDRESS METHOD [OPTIONS] > >> > # hostnossl DATABASE USER ADDRESS METHOD [OPTIONS] > >> > # host name, or it is > >> > > >> > All are considered comments, and all have a valid first column, so all > >> > are displayed. Which is a bit disturbing because they are part of the > >> > comments in pg_hba.conf, they are not supposed to be "actual" lines. > >> > > >> > So, they match our process of identifiying lines, and so they are > >> > displayed. Do you have any idea how we could not display these? I mean, > >> > I can simply add a check on the line string to see if they are equal to > >> > the one of the five strings above, but it seems quite a ugly hack. > >> > >> Why don't we just ignore anything that starts with a # ? > >> > > > > Because we need to guess which comment is an actual comment and which > > comment is a disabled configuration. That allows us to hide actual > > comments, and show disabled configuration. Problem is that our guess is > > wrong sometimes. > > Sounds like you're trying to be too clever. I'm not. That's what the code already does since quite a long time. Problem is it doesn't show lines that are enabled and invalid. And if I try to show invalid lines, it shows even ones I don't want. Hmmm, thinking now that I could show invalid but enabled lines, and not invalid and disabled lines. > We don't normally care > about commented lines in configuration files. If you really want to do > so tough, check if a token is wrapped in [ ] - that never happen in a > valid configuration I don't believe. > Actually, I'm fine with simply ignoring comments. > >> > Or do we simply choose to not care? we prefer to have the bugfix even if > >> > it means to show some not "actual" config lines? > >> > >> Not those. > >> > > > > I don't get it, sorry :) > > > > What do you mean by "not those"? > > We don't want to show those lines. > OK. > >> > Another related question: peer, radius are not available in the method. > >> > As we are in beta, I won't add them to 1.14 branch, will I? > >> > >> I would consider their omission to be a bug. > >> > > > > Hmmm, OK. Will fix then. > > Thanks. > Done. -- Guillaume http://blog.guillaume.lelarge.info http://www.dalibo.com
On Sun, 2011-07-17 at 11:30 +0200, Guillaume Lelarge wrote: > On Sun, 2011-07-17 at 10:12 +0100, Dave Page wrote: > > On Saturday, July 16, 2011, Guillaume Lelarge <guillaume@lelarge.info> wrote: > > > On Sat, 2011-07-16 at 21:11 +0100, Dave Page wrote: > > >> On Sat, Jul 16, 2011 at 1:12 PM, Guillaume Lelarge > > >> <guillaume@lelarge.info> wrote: > > >> > Hi, > > >> > > > >> > I worked a bit this morning on this bug. The editor was made in a way > > >> > that invalid configuration lines are not displayed which is wrong > > >> > because you can't fix a line if you stored it wrong once. > > >> > > > >> > So I did the change to allow the change of an invalid configuration > > >> > line, and that works well. > > >> > > > >> > But I now have many other lines that aren't supposed to appear: > > >> > > > >> > # local DATABASE USER METHOD [OPTIONS] > > >> > # host DATABASE USER ADDRESS METHOD [OPTIONS] > > >> > # hostssl DATABASE USER ADDRESS METHOD [OPTIONS] > > >> > # hostnossl DATABASE USER ADDRESS METHOD [OPTIONS] > > >> > # host name, or it is > > >> > > > >> > All are considered comments, and all have a valid first column, so all > > >> > are displayed. Which is a bit disturbing because they are part of the > > >> > comments in pg_hba.conf, they are not supposed to be "actual" lines. > > >> > > > >> > So, they match our process of identifiying lines, and so they are > > >> > displayed. Do you have any idea how we could not display these? I mean, > > >> > I can simply add a check on the line string to see if they are equal to > > >> > the one of the five strings above, but it seems quite a ugly hack. > > >> > > >> Why don't we just ignore anything that starts with a # ? > > >> > > > > > > Because we need to guess which comment is an actual comment and which > > > comment is a disabled configuration. That allows us to hide actual > > > comments, and show disabled configuration. Problem is that our guess is > > > wrong sometimes. > > > > Sounds like you're trying to be too clever. > > I'm not. That's what the code already does since quite a long time. > Problem is it doesn't show lines that are enabled and invalid. And if I > try to show invalid lines, it shows even ones I don't want. > > Hmmm, thinking now that I could show invalid but enabled lines, and not > invalid and disabled lines. > I've commited this one. Seems to work fine. -- Guillaume http://blog.guillaume.lelarge.info http://www.dalibo.com
On Sun, Jul 17, 2011 at 4:13 PM, Guillaume Lelarge <guillaume@lelarge.info> wrote: > On Sun, 2011-07-17 at 11:30 +0200, Guillaume Lelarge wrote: >> On Sun, 2011-07-17 at 10:12 +0100, Dave Page wrote: >> > On Saturday, July 16, 2011, Guillaume Lelarge <guillaume@lelarge.info> wrote: >> > > On Sat, 2011-07-16 at 21:11 +0100, Dave Page wrote: >> > >> On Sat, Jul 16, 2011 at 1:12 PM, Guillaume Lelarge >> > >> <guillaume@lelarge.info> wrote: >> > >> > Hi, >> > >> > >> > >> > I worked a bit this morning on this bug. The editor was made in a way >> > >> > that invalid configuration lines are not displayed which is wrong >> > >> > because you can't fix a line if you stored it wrong once. >> > >> > >> > >> > So I did the change to allow the change of an invalid configuration >> > >> > line, and that works well. >> > >> > >> > >> > But I now have many other lines that aren't supposed to appear: >> > >> > >> > >> > # local DATABASE USER METHOD [OPTIONS] >> > >> > # host DATABASE USER ADDRESS METHOD [OPTIONS] >> > >> > # hostssl DATABASE USER ADDRESS METHOD [OPTIONS] >> > >> > # hostnossl DATABASE USER ADDRESS METHOD [OPTIONS] >> > >> > # host name, or it is >> > >> > >> > >> > All are considered comments, and all have a valid first column, so all >> > >> > are displayed. Which is a bit disturbing because they are part of the >> > >> > comments in pg_hba.conf, they are not supposed to be "actual" lines. >> > >> > >> > >> > So, they match our process of identifiying lines, and so they are >> > >> > displayed. Do you have any idea how we could not display these? I mean, >> > >> > I can simply add a check on the line string to see if they are equal to >> > >> > the one of the five strings above, but it seems quite a ugly hack. >> > >> >> > >> Why don't we just ignore anything that starts with a # ? >> > >> >> > > >> > > Because we need to guess which comment is an actual comment and which >> > > comment is a disabled configuration. That allows us to hide actual >> > > comments, and show disabled configuration. Problem is that our guess is >> > > wrong sometimes. >> > >> > Sounds like you're trying to be too clever. >> >> I'm not. That's what the code already does since quite a long time. >> Problem is it doesn't show lines that are enabled and invalid. And if I >> try to show invalid lines, it shows even ones I don't want. >> >> Hmmm, thinking now that I could show invalid but enabled lines, and not >> invalid and disabled lines. >> > > I've commited this one. Seems to work fine. Seems pretty broken on Windows unfortunately: 1>Generating svnversion.h for revision REL-1_14_0-BETA3-12-gc047d65. 1>Compiling... 1>dlgColumn.cpp 1>c:\users\dpage\documents\pgadmin3-1.14\pgadmin\dlg\dlgcolumn.cpp(595) : error C2509: 'GetTypeOid' : member function not declared in 'dlgColumn' 1> c:\users\dpage\documents\pgadmin3\pgadmin\include\dlg\dlgcolumn.h(21) : see declaration of 'dlgColumn' 1>dlgHbaConfig.cpp 1>dlgProperty.cpp 1>dlgTable.cpp 1>c:\users\dpage\documents\pgadmin3-1.14\pgadmin\dlg\dlgtable.cpp(1894) : error C2660: 'dlgTypeProperty::GetTypeOid' : function does not take 0 arguments 1>frmHbaConfig.cpp 1>c:\users\dpage\documents\pgadmin3-1.14\pgadmin\frm\frmhbaconfig.cpp(175) : error C2039: 'isValid' : is not a member of 'pgHbaConfigLine' 1> c:\users\dpage\documents\pgadmin3\pgadmin\include\utils\pgconfig.h(59) : see declaration of 'pgHbaConfigLine' 1>c:\users\dpage\documents\pgadmin3-1.14\pgadmin\frm\frmhbaconfig.cpp(175) : error C2039: 'isValid' : is not a member of 'pgHbaConfigLine' 1> c:\users\dpage\documents\pgadmin3\pgadmin\include\utils\pgconfig.h(59) : see declaration of 'pgHbaConfigLine' 1>pgColumn.cpp 1>pgconfig.cpp 1>c:\users\dpage\documents\pgadmin3-1.14\pgadmin\utils\pgconfig.cpp(390) : error C2065: 'isValid' : undeclared identifier 1>c:\users\dpage\documents\pgadmin3-1.14\pgadmin\utils\pgconfig.cpp(399) : error C2065: 'isValid' : undeclared identifier 1>c:\users\dpage\documents\pgadmin3-1.14\pgadmin\utils\pgconfig.cpp(510) : error C2065: 'isValid' : undeclared identifier Please fix! -- Dave Page Blog: http://pgsnake.blogspot.com Twitter: @pgsnake EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
On Mon, 2011-07-18 at 09:41 +0100, Dave Page wrote: > On Sun, Jul 17, 2011 at 4:13 PM, Guillaume Lelarge > <guillaume@lelarge.info> wrote: > > On Sun, 2011-07-17 at 11:30 +0200, Guillaume Lelarge wrote: > >> On Sun, 2011-07-17 at 10:12 +0100, Dave Page wrote: > >> > On Saturday, July 16, 2011, Guillaume Lelarge <guillaume@lelarge.info> wrote: > >> > > On Sat, 2011-07-16 at 21:11 +0100, Dave Page wrote: > >> > >> On Sat, Jul 16, 2011 at 1:12 PM, Guillaume Lelarge > >> > >> <guillaume@lelarge.info> wrote: > >> > >> > Hi, > >> > >> > > >> > >> > I worked a bit this morning on this bug. The editor was made in a way > >> > >> > that invalid configuration lines are not displayed which is wrong > >> > >> > because you can't fix a line if you stored it wrong once. > >> > >> > > >> > >> > So I did the change to allow the change of an invalid configuration > >> > >> > line, and that works well. > >> > >> > > >> > >> > But I now have many other lines that aren't supposed to appear: > >> > >> > > >> > >> > # local DATABASE USER METHOD [OPTIONS] > >> > >> > # host DATABASE USER ADDRESS METHOD [OPTIONS] > >> > >> > # hostssl DATABASE USER ADDRESS METHOD [OPTIONS] > >> > >> > # hostnossl DATABASE USER ADDRESS METHOD [OPTIONS] > >> > >> > # host name, or it is > >> > >> > > >> > >> > All are considered comments, and all have a valid first column, so all > >> > >> > are displayed. Which is a bit disturbing because they are part of the > >> > >> > comments in pg_hba.conf, they are not supposed to be "actual" lines. > >> > >> > > >> > >> > So, they match our process of identifiying lines, and so they are > >> > >> > displayed. Do you have any idea how we could not display these? I mean, > >> > >> > I can simply add a check on the line string to see if they are equal to > >> > >> > the one of the five strings above, but it seems quite a ugly hack. > >> > >> > >> > >> Why don't we just ignore anything that starts with a # ? > >> > >> > >> > > > >> > > Because we need to guess which comment is an actual comment and which > >> > > comment is a disabled configuration. That allows us to hide actual > >> > > comments, and show disabled configuration. Problem is that our guess is > >> > > wrong sometimes. > >> > > >> > Sounds like you're trying to be too clever. > >> > >> I'm not. That's what the code already does since quite a long time. > >> Problem is it doesn't show lines that are enabled and invalid. And if I > >> try to show invalid lines, it shows even ones I don't want. > >> > >> Hmmm, thinking now that I could show invalid but enabled lines, and not > >> invalid and disabled lines. > >> > > > > I've commited this one. Seems to work fine. > > Seems pretty broken on Windows unfortunately: > > 1>Generating svnversion.h for revision REL-1_14_0-BETA3-12-gc047d65. > 1>Compiling... > 1>dlgColumn.cpp > 1>c:\users\dpage\documents\pgadmin3-1.14\pgadmin\dlg\dlgcolumn.cpp(595) > : error C2509: 'GetTypeOid' : member function not declared in > 'dlgColumn' > 1> c:\users\dpage\documents\pgadmin3\pgadmin\include\dlg\dlgcolumn.h(21) > : see declaration of 'dlgColumn' > 1>dlgHbaConfig.cpp > 1>dlgProperty.cpp > 1>dlgTable.cpp > 1>c:\users\dpage\documents\pgadmin3-1.14\pgadmin\dlg\dlgtable.cpp(1894) > : error C2660: 'dlgTypeProperty::GetTypeOid' : function does not take > 0 arguments > 1>frmHbaConfig.cpp > 1>c:\users\dpage\documents\pgadmin3-1.14\pgadmin\frm\frmhbaconfig.cpp(175) > : error C2039: 'isValid' : is not a member of 'pgHbaConfigLine' > 1> c:\users\dpage\documents\pgadmin3\pgadmin\include\utils\pgconfig.h(59) > : see declaration of 'pgHbaConfigLine' > 1>c:\users\dpage\documents\pgadmin3-1.14\pgadmin\frm\frmhbaconfig.cpp(175) > : error C2039: 'isValid' : is not a member of 'pgHbaConfigLine' > 1> c:\users\dpage\documents\pgadmin3\pgadmin\include\utils\pgconfig.h(59) > : see declaration of 'pgHbaConfigLine' > 1>pgColumn.cpp > 1>pgconfig.cpp > 1>c:\users\dpage\documents\pgadmin3-1.14\pgadmin\utils\pgconfig.cpp(390) > : error C2065: 'isValid' : undeclared identifier > 1>c:\users\dpage\documents\pgadmin3-1.14\pgadmin\utils\pgconfig.cpp(399) > : error C2065: 'isValid' : undeclared identifier > 1>c:\users\dpage\documents\pgadmin3-1.14\pgadmin\utils\pgconfig.cpp(510) > : error C2065: 'isValid' : undeclared identifier > > Please fix! > Will do this evening. -- Guillaume http://blog.guillaume.lelarge.info http://www.dalibo.com
Thanks. On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 1:40 PM, Guillaume Lelarge <guillaume@lelarge.info> wrote: > On Mon, 2011-07-18 at 09:41 +0100, Dave Page wrote: >> On Sun, Jul 17, 2011 at 4:13 PM, Guillaume Lelarge >> <guillaume@lelarge.info> wrote: >> > On Sun, 2011-07-17 at 11:30 +0200, Guillaume Lelarge wrote: >> >> On Sun, 2011-07-17 at 10:12 +0100, Dave Page wrote: >> >> > On Saturday, July 16, 2011, Guillaume Lelarge <guillaume@lelarge.info> wrote: >> >> > > On Sat, 2011-07-16 at 21:11 +0100, Dave Page wrote: >> >> > >> On Sat, Jul 16, 2011 at 1:12 PM, Guillaume Lelarge >> >> > >> <guillaume@lelarge.info> wrote: >> >> > >> > Hi, >> >> > >> > >> >> > >> > I worked a bit this morning on this bug. The editor was made in a way >> >> > >> > that invalid configuration lines are not displayed which is wrong >> >> > >> > because you can't fix a line if you stored it wrong once. >> >> > >> > >> >> > >> > So I did the change to allow the change of an invalid configuration >> >> > >> > line, and that works well. >> >> > >> > >> >> > >> > But I now have many other lines that aren't supposed to appear: >> >> > >> > >> >> > >> > # local DATABASE USER METHOD [OPTIONS] >> >> > >> > # host DATABASE USER ADDRESS METHOD [OPTIONS] >> >> > >> > # hostssl DATABASE USER ADDRESS METHOD [OPTIONS] >> >> > >> > # hostnossl DATABASE USER ADDRESS METHOD [OPTIONS] >> >> > >> > # host name, or it is >> >> > >> > >> >> > >> > All are considered comments, and all have a valid first column, so all >> >> > >> > are displayed. Which is a bit disturbing because they are part of the >> >> > >> > comments in pg_hba.conf, they are not supposed to be "actual" lines. >> >> > >> > >> >> > >> > So, they match our process of identifiying lines, and so they are >> >> > >> > displayed. Do you have any idea how we could not display these? I mean, >> >> > >> > I can simply add a check on the line string to see if they are equal to >> >> > >> > the one of the five strings above, but it seems quite a ugly hack. >> >> > >> >> >> > >> Why don't we just ignore anything that starts with a # ? >> >> > >> >> >> > > >> >> > > Because we need to guess which comment is an actual comment and which >> >> > > comment is a disabled configuration. That allows us to hide actual >> >> > > comments, and show disabled configuration. Problem is that our guess is >> >> > > wrong sometimes. >> >> > >> >> > Sounds like you're trying to be too clever. >> >> >> >> I'm not. That's what the code already does since quite a long time. >> >> Problem is it doesn't show lines that are enabled and invalid. And if I >> >> try to show invalid lines, it shows even ones I don't want. >> >> >> >> Hmmm, thinking now that I could show invalid but enabled lines, and not >> >> invalid and disabled lines. >> >> >> > >> > I've commited this one. Seems to work fine. >> >> Seems pretty broken on Windows unfortunately: >> >> 1>Generating svnversion.h for revision REL-1_14_0-BETA3-12-gc047d65. >> 1>Compiling... >> 1>dlgColumn.cpp >> 1>c:\users\dpage\documents\pgadmin3-1.14\pgadmin\dlg\dlgcolumn.cpp(595) >> : error C2509: 'GetTypeOid' : member function not declared in >> 'dlgColumn' >> 1> c:\users\dpage\documents\pgadmin3\pgadmin\include\dlg\dlgcolumn.h(21) >> : see declaration of 'dlgColumn' >> 1>dlgHbaConfig.cpp >> 1>dlgProperty.cpp >> 1>dlgTable.cpp >> 1>c:\users\dpage\documents\pgadmin3-1.14\pgadmin\dlg\dlgtable.cpp(1894) >> : error C2660: 'dlgTypeProperty::GetTypeOid' : function does not take >> 0 arguments >> 1>frmHbaConfig.cpp >> 1>c:\users\dpage\documents\pgadmin3-1.14\pgadmin\frm\frmhbaconfig.cpp(175) >> : error C2039: 'isValid' : is not a member of 'pgHbaConfigLine' >> 1> c:\users\dpage\documents\pgadmin3\pgadmin\include\utils\pgconfig.h(59) >> : see declaration of 'pgHbaConfigLine' >> 1>c:\users\dpage\documents\pgadmin3-1.14\pgadmin\frm\frmhbaconfig.cpp(175) >> : error C2039: 'isValid' : is not a member of 'pgHbaConfigLine' >> 1> c:\users\dpage\documents\pgadmin3\pgadmin\include\utils\pgconfig.h(59) >> : see declaration of 'pgHbaConfigLine' >> 1>pgColumn.cpp >> 1>pgconfig.cpp >> 1>c:\users\dpage\documents\pgadmin3-1.14\pgadmin\utils\pgconfig.cpp(390) >> : error C2065: 'isValid' : undeclared identifier >> 1>c:\users\dpage\documents\pgadmin3-1.14\pgadmin\utils\pgconfig.cpp(399) >> : error C2065: 'isValid' : undeclared identifier >> 1>c:\users\dpage\documents\pgadmin3-1.14\pgadmin\utils\pgconfig.cpp(510) >> : error C2065: 'isValid' : undeclared identifier >> >> Please fix! >> > > Will do this evening. > > > -- > Guillaume > http://blog.guillaume.lelarge.info > http://www.dalibo.com > > -- Dave Page Blog: http://pgsnake.blogspot.com Twitter: @pgsnake EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
On Mon, 2011-07-18 at 14:40 +0200, Guillaume Lelarge wrote: > On Mon, 2011-07-18 at 09:41 +0100, Dave Page wrote: > > On Sun, Jul 17, 2011 at 4:13 PM, Guillaume Lelarge > > <guillaume@lelarge.info> wrote: > > > On Sun, 2011-07-17 at 11:30 +0200, Guillaume Lelarge wrote: > > >> On Sun, 2011-07-17 at 10:12 +0100, Dave Page wrote: > > >> > On Saturday, July 16, 2011, Guillaume Lelarge <guillaume@lelarge.info> wrote: > > >> > > On Sat, 2011-07-16 at 21:11 +0100, Dave Page wrote: > > >> > >> On Sat, Jul 16, 2011 at 1:12 PM, Guillaume Lelarge > > >> > >> <guillaume@lelarge.info> wrote: > > >> > >> > Hi, > > >> > >> > > > >> > >> > I worked a bit this morning on this bug. The editor was made in a way > > >> > >> > that invalid configuration lines are not displayed which is wrong > > >> > >> > because you can't fix a line if you stored it wrong once. > > >> > >> > > > >> > >> > So I did the change to allow the change of an invalid configuration > > >> > >> > line, and that works well. > > >> > >> > > > >> > >> > But I now have many other lines that aren't supposed to appear: > > >> > >> > > > >> > >> > # local DATABASE USER METHOD [OPTIONS] > > >> > >> > # host DATABASE USER ADDRESS METHOD [OPTIONS] > > >> > >> > # hostssl DATABASE USER ADDRESS METHOD [OPTIONS] > > >> > >> > # hostnossl DATABASE USER ADDRESS METHOD [OPTIONS] > > >> > >> > # host name, or it is > > >> > >> > > > >> > >> > All are considered comments, and all have a valid first column, so all > > >> > >> > are displayed. Which is a bit disturbing because they are part of the > > >> > >> > comments in pg_hba.conf, they are not supposed to be "actual" lines. > > >> > >> > > > >> > >> > So, they match our process of identifiying lines, and so they are > > >> > >> > displayed. Do you have any idea how we could not display these? I mean, > > >> > >> > I can simply add a check on the line string to see if they are equal to > > >> > >> > the one of the five strings above, but it seems quite a ugly hack. > > >> > >> > > >> > >> Why don't we just ignore anything that starts with a # ? > > >> > >> > > >> > > > > >> > > Because we need to guess which comment is an actual comment and which > > >> > > comment is a disabled configuration. That allows us to hide actual > > >> > > comments, and show disabled configuration. Problem is that our guess is > > >> > > wrong sometimes. > > >> > > > >> > Sounds like you're trying to be too clever. > > >> > > >> I'm not. That's what the code already does since quite a long time. > > >> Problem is it doesn't show lines that are enabled and invalid. And if I > > >> try to show invalid lines, it shows even ones I don't want. > > >> > > >> Hmmm, thinking now that I could show invalid but enabled lines, and not > > >> invalid and disabled lines. > > >> > > > > > > I've commited this one. Seems to work fine. > > > > Seems pretty broken on Windows unfortunately: > > > > 1>Generating svnversion.h for revision REL-1_14_0-BETA3-12-gc047d65. > > 1>Compiling... > > 1>dlgColumn.cpp > > 1>c:\users\dpage\documents\pgadmin3-1.14\pgadmin\dlg\dlgcolumn.cpp(595) > > : error C2509: 'GetTypeOid' : member function not declared in > > 'dlgColumn' > > 1> c:\users\dpage\documents\pgadmin3\pgadmin\include\dlg\dlgcolumn.h(21) > > : see declaration of 'dlgColumn' > > 1>dlgHbaConfig.cpp > > 1>dlgProperty.cpp > > 1>dlgTable.cpp > > 1>c:\users\dpage\documents\pgadmin3-1.14\pgadmin\dlg\dlgtable.cpp(1894) > > : error C2660: 'dlgTypeProperty::GetTypeOid' : function does not take > > 0 arguments > > 1>frmHbaConfig.cpp > > 1>c:\users\dpage\documents\pgadmin3-1.14\pgadmin\frm\frmhbaconfig.cpp(175) > > : error C2039: 'isValid' : is not a member of 'pgHbaConfigLine' > > 1> c:\users\dpage\documents\pgadmin3\pgadmin\include\utils\pgconfig.h(59) > > : see declaration of 'pgHbaConfigLine' > > 1>c:\users\dpage\documents\pgadmin3-1.14\pgadmin\frm\frmhbaconfig.cpp(175) > > : error C2039: 'isValid' : is not a member of 'pgHbaConfigLine' > > 1> c:\users\dpage\documents\pgadmin3\pgadmin\include\utils\pgconfig.h(59) > > : see declaration of 'pgHbaConfigLine' > > 1>pgColumn.cpp > > 1>pgconfig.cpp > > 1>c:\users\dpage\documents\pgadmin3-1.14\pgadmin\utils\pgconfig.cpp(390) > > : error C2065: 'isValid' : undeclared identifier > > 1>c:\users\dpage\documents\pgadmin3-1.14\pgadmin\utils\pgconfig.cpp(399) > > : error C2065: 'isValid' : undeclared identifier > > 1>c:\users\dpage\documents\pgadmin3-1.14\pgadmin\utils\pgconfig.cpp(510) > > : error C2065: 'isValid' : undeclared identifier > > > > Please fix! > > > > Will do this evening. > Compiled it with Visual Studio Express 2008, with no error whatsoever. Debug and Release. 1.14 and master. Have you done any changes? -- Guillaume http://blog.guillaume.lelarge.info http://www.dalibo.com
On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 8:33 PM, Guillaume Lelarge <guillaume@lelarge.info> wrote: > > Compiled it with Visual Studio Express 2008, with no error whatsoever. > Debug and Release. 1.14 and master. Have you done any changes? Oh crap - my bad. I forgot to clean the build first. Sorry for the noise. -- Dave Page Blog: http://pgsnake.blogspot.com Twitter: @pgsnake EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company