| From: | "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Luca Ferrari <fluca1978(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Dominique Devienne <ddevienne(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | How to fork pg_dump or psql w/o leaking secrets? |
| Date: | 2023-09-22 15:18:34 |
| Message-ID: | CAKFQuwYQFtFp3VDBi_D=+6teNyn6YnDxZYXcYhL76xin6agVVA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Friday, September 22, 2023, Luca Ferrari <fluca1978(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> > That's why I'm asking the community how best to the forked PSQL can
> connect w/o password prompting.
>
> psql and lipq can exploit .pgpass for exactly that aim: not messing
> around with passwords.
> Again, I would discourage you to fork psql. Would you be able to
> maintain the new upcoming versions in the future?
>
>
The OP seems to be used the term fork in a process sense, not forking the
source code. Process execution from within another program. “Launch” or
“execute” psql would be a better choice of wording here.
David J.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Luca Ferrari | 2023-09-22 15:19:05 | Re: How to fork pg_dump or psql w/o leaking secrets? |
| Previous Message | Luca Ferrari | 2023-09-22 15:00:34 | Re: debugger from superuser only.... why? |