| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> |
| Cc: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Michael Meskes <meskes(at)postgresql(dot)org>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: ECPG installcheck tests fail if PGDATABASE is set |
| Date: | 2019-09-27 21:39:16 |
| Message-ID: | 26186.1569620356@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> writes:
> On Sun, Mar 18, 2018 at 5:28 PM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> Don't think I like ecpg's tests behaving differently in this respect
>> than the rest of them do; that seems like a recipe for unrecognized
>> security issues.
>>
>> If nobody can think of a positive reason for pg_regress not to
>> unset PGDATABASE unconditionally, let's try that and see how it
>> goes.
> It would be nice to get this fixed. Several people have been confused
> by it at this point.
I think I just forgot about this thread. Shall we change it in HEAD
and see what happens? Maybe backpatch, but not till after 12.0 is out.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2019-09-27 21:43:00 | Re: ECPG installcheck tests fail if PGDATABASE is set |
| Previous Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2019-09-27 21:32:34 | Re: ECPG installcheck tests fail if PGDATABASE is set |