Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: [BUGS] More SSL questions..

From: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: "T(dot)J(dot)" <tjtoocool(at)phreaker(dot)net>,pgsql-hackers-win32(at)postgresql(dot)org,Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>,Magnus Hagander <mha(at)sollentuna(dot)net>,"Matthew T(dot) O'Connor" <matthew(at)zeut(dot)net>,Dave Page <dpage(at)vale-housing(dot)co(dot)uk>
Subject: Re: [BUGS] More SSL questions..
Date: 2005-01-08 22:02:04
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers-win32

Tom Lane wrote:

>"T.J." <tjtoocool(at)phreaker(dot)net> writes:
>>Has anyone else tested out the use of client certs with the new win 
>>code? Rebuilt the latest from scratch and I started getting SSL SYSCALL, 
>>so I went into fe-secure.c, and commented out line 842 (again), and now 
>>it works (again). Any ideas why commenting that line is such a 
>>penicillin? Or rather, why that if statement is causing such problems. 
>Doh --- isn't fstat's st_ino a meaningless value on Windows?

Pretty much, yes. See 

The latter states:  "The inode, and therefore *st_ino*, has no meaning 
in the FAT, HPFS, or NTFS file systems." The fstat page doesn't even 
refer to it at all.



In response to


pgsql-hackers-win32 by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2005-01-08 22:26:39
Subject: Re: [BUGS] More SSL questions..
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2005-01-08 17:37:49
Subject: Re: [BUGS] More SSL questions..

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group