> On 30 Nov 2021, at 00:16, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
>> On 29 Nov 2021, at 23:50, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Otherwise I think it's good to go, so I marked it RFC.
>
> Great! I'll take another look over it tomorrow and will go ahead with it
> then.
I applied your nitpick diff and took it for another
> On 29 Nov 2021, at 23:50, Tom Lane wrote:
>
> Daniel Gustafsson writes:
>> Agreed. The attached v3 covers the issuer and extension function to at least
>> some degree. In order to reliably test the extension I added a new cert
>> with a
>> CA extension.
>
> I have two remaining trivial nit
Daniel Gustafsson writes:
> Agreed. The attached v3 covers the issuer and extension function to at least
> some degree. In order to reliably test the extension I added a new cert with
> a
> CA extension.
I have two remaining trivial nitpicks, for which I attach an 0004
delta patch: the README
> On 27 Nov 2021, at 20:27, Tom Lane wrote:
> I don't have any problem with this structurally, but I do have a
> few nitpicks:
Thanks for reviewing!
> * I think the error message added in 0001 should complain about
> missing password "encryption" not "encoding", no?
Doh, of course.
> * 0002 h
On Sat, Nov 27, 2021 at 02:27:19PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> I think testing sslinfo in src/test/ssl is fine, while putting its test
> inside contrib/ would be dangerous, because then the test would be run
> by default. src/test/ssl is not run by default because the server it
> starts is potentiall
Daniel Gustafsson writes:
> On 17 Jun 2021, at 09:29, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> Hmm. Adding internal dependencies between the tests should be avoided
>> if we can. What would it take to move those TAP tests to
>> contrib/sslinfo instead? This is while keeping in mind that there was
>> a patch
> On 17 Jun 2021, at 09:29, Michael Paquier wrote:
>
> On Thu, May 20, 2021 at 08:40:48PM +0200, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
>>> On 19 May 2021, at 21:05, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>>>
>>> On 5/19/21 1:01 PM, Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker wrote:
Daniel Gustafsson writes:
> In order to be ab
On Thu, May 20, 2021 at 08:40:48PM +0200, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
> > On 19 May 2021, at 21:05, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> >
> > On 5/19/21 1:01 PM, Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker wrote:
> >> Daniel Gustafsson writes:
> >>
> >>> In order to be able to test extensions with SSL connections, allow
> >>> c
> On 19 May 2021, at 21:05, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
> On 5/19/21 1:01 PM, Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker wrote:
>> Daniel Gustafsson writes:
>>
>>> In order to be able to test extensions with SSL connections, allow
>>> configure_test_server_for_ssl to create any extensions passed as
>>> comma separat
On 5/19/21 1:01 PM, Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker wrote:
> Daniel Gustafsson writes:
>
>> In order to be able to test extensions with SSL connections, allow
>> configure_test_server_for_ssl to create any extensions passed as
>> comma separated list. Each extension is created in all the test
>> databa
Daniel Gustafsson writes:
> In order to be able to test extensions with SSL connections, allow
> configure_test_server_for_ssl to create any extensions passed as
> comma separated list. Each extension is created in all the test
> databases which may or may not be useful.
Why the comma-separated
While playing around with the recent SSL testharness changes I wrote a test
suite for sslinfo as a side effect, which seemed valuable in its own right as
we currently have no coverage of this code. The small change needed to the
testharness is to support installing modules, which is broken out int
12 matches
Mail list logo
