Re: [HACKERS] non-ipv6 vs hostnames
On tis, 2011-08-16 at 16:17 +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote: Well, I got this on a win64 build. It's *supposed* to have ipv6. I wonder if it breaks on windows just because there is no ipv6 address on the machine... It would mean that getaddrinfo() of ::1 failed. That seems weird. A system admin can set registry keys to disable IPv6, either partially (allowing ::1), or totally (all IPv6 addresses fail). If the system has IPv6 enabled, it's not possible for there to be no ipv6 address. There is always the link-local address of each LAN adapter. -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Re: [HACKERS] Debian readline/libedit breakage
On 02/17/2011 12:34 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote: Andrew Dunstan wrote: On 02/17/2011 12:13 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote: FWIW, the only interactively usable version of psql for windows I know of is the one that runs under Cygwin. It can be build with readline and works as expected. Uh, don't we have a psql built via MSVC? Doesn't it work interactively? Not if you want readline. And in my book that's a requirement of a psql that's usable interactively. It's pretty horrible to use without it. Well, as horrible as other Windows apps. I will leave others to decide if that is usable. ;-) I am unclear if we would ship readline support on Windows even if we didn't have a license issue (no OS readline version on Windows). Windows developers almost universally work from GUIs and not using console apps (and that's true of many Unix developers also, particularly those who can't recall a time when X-Windows wasn't almost universally available). Microsoft has de-emphasized console apps for 15 years. So the only people who are likely to be interested in using an enhanced psql on Windows are old Unix-heads like you and me. It's not worth a lot of effort, IMNSHO. cheers andrew I think this is wrong... There are plenty of people who use the command line in Windows, and Microsoft has been adding better support for this, including PowerShell and interfaces to every administrative operation from command line scripts. Psql on Windows is ugly... Readline does (supposedly) run on Windows, but no one has done the work to get it to happen. One of the problems with libedit is that it does not support Windows, as far as I know. I don't know of a good solution, given the license for readline. But it would sure be nice. -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Re: [HACKERS] Debian readline/libedit breakage
charles.mcdev...@emc.com wrote: The GNU people will never be 100% satisfied by anything you do to psql, other than making it GPL. Readline is specifically licensed in a way to try to force this (but many disagree with their ability to force this). The GNU people are perfectly content with the license of PostgreSQL. They are unhappy with the license terms of OpenSSL, which is fair because they are ridiculous. Eric Young and the rest of the contributors produced a useful piece of software, and made it considerly less valuable to the world due to the ego trip terms: http://www.openssl.org/source/license.html -- the worst specific problem is the requirement to acknowledge OpenSSL use in advertising of projects that use it. The PostgreSQL community has had similar issues with popular software commonly used on top of PostgreSQL, that happened to use a non-standard license with unique terms. It would be both hypocritical and incorrect to now blame the GNU projects for taking a similar stand on this one. You are correct... I overreacted, after having run into problems in the past with GPL (vs LGPL) issues. My apologies to all for adding stupid distracting comments to this thread. It would be wonderful if the OpenSSL people would compromise on this, but I suppose that isn't possible. I'd love to see libedit get better, and would like to see that solution, because OpenSSL's FIPS compliance really helps with Federal customers, but I realize that involves a lot of effort. I hope if the PostgreSQL project goes down the path of switching to GnuTLS, OpenSSL remains an option (for the server side). -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Re: [HACKERS] Debian readline/libedit breakage
Don't forget that OpenSSL has a FIPS-140 compliant version, and FIPS-140 compliance is essential to many Federal users. GnuTLS doesn't qualify. -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Re: [HACKERS] Debian readline/libedit breakage
If psql uses libreadline and libgnutls, does that mean psql will be distributed under the GPL in the future? Or Dual-licensed? If I read the readline license right, applications that link to it must be GPL. That's why we (EMC/Greenplum) switch to libedit, even though readline is nicer... We didn't want to ship part of our product as GPL -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Re: [HACKERS] Debian readline/libedit breakage
-Original Message- From: gsst...@gmail.com [mailto:gsst...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Greg Stark Sent: Friday, February 11, 2011 4:03 PM On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 11:06 PM, charles.mcdev...@emc.com wrote: The GNU people will never be 100% satisfied by anything you do to psql, other than making it GPL. Readline is specifically licensed in a way to try to force this (but many disagree with their ability to force this). This is just libelous FUD. There's absolutely no reason postgres would have to be GPL'd to satisfy any library license. Ok, but be aware that readline is GPL v3, not GPL v2, and has those additional requirements. -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Re: [HACKERS] Debian readline/libedit breakage
-Original Message- From: gsst...@gmail.com [mailto:gsst...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Greg Stark Sent: Friday, February 11, 2011 4:14 PM To: McDevitt, Charles Cc: sfr...@snowman.net; alvhe...@commandprompt.com; g...@2ndquadrant.com; mba...@debian.org; t...@sss.pgh.pa.us; and...@dunslane.net; j...@commandprompt.com; pgsql- hack...@postgresql.org Subject: Re: Debian readline/libedit breakage On Sat, Feb 12, 2011 at 12:07 AM, charles.mcdev...@emc.com wrote: This is just libelous FUD. There's absolutely no reason postgres would have to be GPL'd to satisfy any library license. Ok, but be aware that readline is GPL v3, not GPL v2, and has those additional requirements. No What? From the GNU Readline home page: Readline is free software, distributed under the terms of the GNU General Public License, version 3. I know it used to be GPLv2, but that isn't true these days. -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Re: [HACKERS] Why don't we accept exponential format for integers?
And so does: SELECT 1.23e+01::Integer which I find just as dangerous as SELECT '1.234e+01'::Integer; Add quotes to either of the other two, and then they don't work either. Well, that's stupidly arbitrary. If we're not going to accept '1.234e+01'::Integer, then we shouldn't accept 1.234e+01::Integer either. Isn't this a case of an explicit cast? Shouldn't our answer to 1.234e+1::Integer be the same as CAST(1234e+1 AS Integer)? Which is legal ISO SQL, as far as I can see. -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
