Re: [PATCH] Automatic client certificate selection support for libpq v1

From: Seth Robertson <in-pgsql-hackers(at)baka(dot)org>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Automatic client certificate selection support for libpq v1
Date: 2009-05-08 21:52:12
Message-ID: 200905082152.n48LqCkN007954@no.baka.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers


In message <14727(dot)1241816192(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Tom Lane writes:

> It is of course possible to support both at the same time (at
> compile-time, if nowhere else).

Yes, I suppose we'd not wish to just drop openssl completely.
I wonder how much code duplication would ensue from a compile-time
choice of which library to use ...

My only datapoint for you is curl, which is an application I happen to
have discovered that can use either NSS and OpenSSL.

Lines Words Chars Filename
2508 7890 74682 ssluse.c
1331 3708 36411 nss.c

I imagine that you would more or less have to provide a different
be-secure.c and fe-secure.c file for the two different
libraries--whether as a separate file or via #ifdefs. It looks like
there is a small amount of common code present (why *is*
pg_block_sigpipe() in that file anyway?)

-Seth Robertson
in-pgsql-hackers(at)baka(dot)org

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2009-05-08 21:55:42 Re: Some 8.4 changes needed according to pg_migrator testing
Previous Message Tom Lane 2009-05-08 21:50:28 Re: strict version of version_stamp.pl