Another update to the vpgsql.c file so that we can also have the
"--enable-onchange-script" option with PostgreSQL as the auth module.
Updated patch is attached.
Again, please double check the patch, i have not done any testing
against it.
Thanks
Bruce
Bruce McAlister wrote:
> Bruce McAlister w
Bruce McAlister wrote:
> Hold on this for a sec, I found a problem.. I diff'ed a different vpgsql
> ..c file than the one i wanted :/
>
Attached is the correct patch :0
Sorry about that :/
!DSPAM:4741892232003992920430!
--- ./vpgsql.c 2007-11-19 12:17:51.734995480 +
+++ ./vpgsql.c_new
Hold on this for a sec, I found a problem.. I diff'ed a different vpgsql
.c file than the one i wanted :/
Bruce McAlister wrote:
> Rick Widmer wrote:
>> That is the basic idea but it was the wrong approach. Would you please
>> change vauth.c back the way it was, then make changes in vpgsql.c to
Rick Widmer wrote:
>
> That is the basic idea but it was the wrong approach. Would you please
> change vauth.c back the way it was, then make changes in vpgsql.c to
> make it work. Once that is done, then do a diff -u oldfile newfile
> and either post the results to this list, or upload it to
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I believe this is a typo as well. I think it should be PQresultStatus
and not PGresultStatus
Charlie
> > now I'm getting the following error:
> >
> >
-
> -
> > /usr/sfw/bi
Rick Widmer wrote:
>
> We just started discussing version 6, so it is very early in the cycle,
> and I still have a list of things that go into 5.4 before I start on 6.
> Too bad I can't put much more than a couple weekends a month into it on
> a regular basis.
>
All the effort is much apprecia
Bruce McAlister wrote:
Rick Widmer wrote:
I am working on making all the back ends work the same way, but not
being a PostgreSQL user, and not seeing all that many people using it,
it isn't a high priority for me. I'll get around to it in or soon after
version 6 hits the street. That may b
Rick Widmer wrote:
>
>
>
> I am working on making all the back ends work the same way, but not
> being a PostgreSQL user, and not seeing all that many people using it,
> it isn't a high priority for me. I'll get around to it in or soon after
> version 6 hits the street. That may be a year or m
