Are we OK with the Coverity reports now? ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Martijn van Oosterhout wrote: -- Start of PGP signed section. > On Fri, Apr 21, 2006 at 09:12:51AM +0800, Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote: > > >I havn't been able to find any more serious issues in the Coverity > > >report, now that they've fixed the ereport() issue. A number of the > > >issues it complains about are things we already Assert() for. For the > > >rest, as long as the following assumptions are true we're done (well, > > >except for ECPG). I think they are true but it's always good to check: > > > > Everytime someone does this, we fix everything except ECPG. Surely it's > > time we fixed ECPG as well? > > I've got a patch (not by me) that should fix most of the issues. > However, we have no way to test for regressions. So, that's why I > suggested (elsewhere) someone get the ECPG regression stuff working so > we can apply fixes and check they don't break anything... > > Have a nice day, > -- > Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog@svana.org> http://svana.org/kleptog/ > > From each according to his ability. To each according to his ability to > > litigate. -- End of PGP section, PGP failed! -- Bruce Momjian http://candle.pha.pa.us EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. + ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend
