On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 5:56 PM, Magnus Hagander <mag...@hagander.net>wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 2:19 PM, Akshay Joshi > <akshay.jo...@enterprisedb.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 5:16 PM, Dave Page <dp...@pgadmin.org> wrote: > >> > >> > >> > >> On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 12:35 PM, Ashesh Vashi > >> <ashesh.va...@enterprisedb.com> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> > >>> Why are we talking about using the external application here? > >> > >> > >> Because I suggested giving it some thought in case it turns out we have > no > >> other option. > >> > >>> > >>> The only problem with the current implementation - is that it does use > >>> new APIs for tunneling. > >>> We can change the implementation based on the current supplied libssh2 > on > >>> most linux flavours. > >>> i.e. libssh2 - 1.2.7 or later > >>> > >>> I have asked Akshay to check - if we can modify the current > >>> implementation to use the older version of libssh2. (feasibility) > >> > >> > >> I've already asked him to investigate whether there is another API that > >> may be used that he may have missed. Only supporting old versions of > libssh2 > >> is unacceptable though - we need to support current versions, and > ideally > >> older ones as well for compatibility with Ubuntu/Debian/RHEL etc. > > > > > > I have investigated, there are two functions libssh2_session_handshake > > and libssh2_exit() which is not available in the older versions. > > libssh2_session_handshake() is replacement function to > > libssh2_session_startup()(deprecated) which was added in the version > 1.2.8 > > and > > libssh2_exist() was added in the version 1.2.5. So to provide backward > > compatibility we can perform the function check instead of configure > > check and will add appropriate macros to build it properly. > > > > Thought??Comments? > > Uh, I'm not sure what you mean with "function check instead of > configure check". You mean trying to load the function at runtime, > with dlopen() and friends? I guess we could, but I don't think pgadmin > has any functionality for that today, so it's going to bring in a fair > amount of platform specific code, isn't it? But if it's not too > complicated, it seems like a good choice. > He means to say - check function check at configuration. i.e. A lot of system does not have snprintf supported so a lot of packages check existence of it at configuration and define HAVE_SNPRINTF macros. -- Thanks & Regards, Ashesh Vashi EnterpriseDB INDIA: Enterprise PostgreSQL Company<http://www.enterprisedb.com/> *http://www.linkedin.com/in/asheshvashi* > -- > Magnus Hagander > Me: http://www.hagander.net/ > Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/ >
