On Mon, Nov 21, 2011 at 19:03, Diego Elio Petten=F2
<flameeyes@flameeyes.eu> wrote:
> Il giorno lun, 21/11/2011 alle 18.59 +0100, Magnus Hagander ha scritto:
>> So a simple extension of the check to be for both ENOENT and ENOTDIR
>> would work, right?
>
> In this case, yes...
Ok, I've applied this quick-fix for head, 9.1 and 9.0 (which is as far
back as that code goes).
Unfortunately I forgot about the push earlier this week, so it's going
to miss the releases that go out early next week. But it will be in
the next ones.
>> So yes, you'd fail. But in a scenario where you had say the wrong
>> permissions on the file, we'd silently ignore it - this doesn't seem
>> like the right thing to do. And it will cause scenarios hard to debug.
>
> I would say that the proper solution would be something like:
>
> Check if the file is reachable with stat; if any error happens during
> stat(), log it (eventually) but let it pass; if the file is present but
> with wrong (too wide?) permissions, throw an error, otherwise just use
> it.
We don't really have a way to log warnings in the libpq client. In
theory we could just spit it to stderr, but that seems like a really
bad idea.
--=20
=A0Magnus Hagander
=A0Me: http://www.hagander.net/
=A0Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/