| From: | Alex Hunsaker <badalex(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)kineticode(dot)com>, Tim Bunce <Tim(dot)Bunce(at)pobox(dot)com>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Safe security |
| Date: | 2010-03-08 20:54:33 |
| Message-ID: | 34d269d41003081254g6caa7a32h49b0e0b259684465@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 10:14, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> "David E. Wheeler" <david(at)kineticode(dot)com> writes:
>> On Mar 8, 2010, at 8:03 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> #3 is still an absolute nonstarter, especially for a patch that we'd
>>> wish to backpatch.
>
>> You're at least going to want to exclude Safe 2.20 - 2.23, IIUC.
>
> If those aren't versions that are likely to be in wide use, no objection
> to that. I'm just concerned about arbitrarily breaking existing
> installations.
Here are a few version numbers for released perls:
perl | safe version
5.8.8 | 2.12
5.8.9 | 2.16
5.10.0 | 2.12
5.10.1 | 2.18
5.12 looks like it will release with > 2.25, 5.10.2 if it ever gets
released is currently at 2.18, 5.8.10 does not even seem to be on the
horizon.
So unless you installed a private version or your distro is providing
updates (I looked at: arch, debian, fedora and openbsd. And they
don't seem to.) it seems unlikely to see >2.18 in the wild.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Kevin Grittner | 2010-03-08 20:58:59 | Re: SQL compatibility reminder: MySQL vs PostgreSQL |
| Previous Message | Pierre C | 2010-03-08 20:28:27 | Re: SQL compatibility reminder: MySQL vs PostgreSQL |