Re: Windows: openssl & gssapi dislike each other

Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>

From: Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>
To: Dave Page <dpage@pgadmin.org>, Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se>
Cc: Imran Zaheer <imran.zhir@gmail.com>, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, PostgreSQL Developers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Date: 2025-01-24T20:07:42Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Commits

Same data as JSON: GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources. API reference →
  1. Move GSSAPI includes into its own header

  2. Tighten test_predtest's input checks, and improve error messages.

  3. Collation documentation fixes.

  4. contrib/sslinfo needs a fix too to make hamerkop happy.

  5. Second attempt to silence SSL compile failures on hamerkop.

On 2025-01-22 We 4:25 AM, Dave Page wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, 22 Jan 2025 at 09:17, Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se> wrote:
>
>     > On 10 Jul 2024, at 19:06, Imran Zaheer <imran.zhir@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>     (Reviving an old thread to give them a chance to finish before v18)
>
>     > For now maybe we can do the future proofing for gssapi & openssl
>     includes
>     > and do testing if openssl clashes with some other lib too.
>
>     Where did this end up, is compilation on Windows with OpenSSL and
>     GSSAPI still
>     an issue?  AFAICT the fixes from this thread are yet to be applied
>     and it would
>     be nice to have that done before v18 if still needed.
>
>
> I kid you not, 20 seconds ago I hit send on a message on a pgAdmin 
> thread where I was complaining this bug was outstanding to someone 
> asking about GSSAPI support on Windows. That's quite the coincidence.
>
>  Anyway, no fix was committed as far as I know. I would suggest it 
> should be back-patched as well.
>
>

I'm quite partial to the approach suggested upthread by Andres (a 
separate pg_gssapi.h file). If there's agreement on that I'm prepared to 
go and make it happen, unless Daniel beats me to it. Backpatching also 
seems reasonable.


cheers


andrew



--
Andrew Dunstan
EDB:https://www.enterprisedb.com