Обсуждение: Windows port minor fixes

Hi,

According to microsoft documentation at:
https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/api/wincrypt/nf-wincrypt-cryptgenrandom
The function CryptGenRandom is deprecated, and may can be removed in future release.
Considering that postgres only supports windows versions that have the new API, it would be good to make the replace.

BCryptGenRandom apparently works without having to set up an environment before calling it, allowing a simplification
inthe file that makes the call. 
The drawback, its change causes need to link to bcrypt.lib.

On exec.c, have two memory leaks, and a possible access beyond heap bounds, the patch tries to fix them.
According to documentation at:
https://en.cppreference.com/w/c/experimental/dynamic/strdup
"The returned pointer must be passed to free to avoid a memory leak. "

* memory leak fix to src/common/exec.c
* CryptGenRandom change by BCryptGenRandom to src/port/pg_strong_random.c
* link bcrypt.lib to src/tools/msvc/Mkvcbuild.pm

regards,
Ranier Vilela

On Mon, Dec 16, 2019 at 07:57:10PM +0100, Juan José Santamaría Flecha wrote:
> If you want to address 2 unrelated issues, it makes little sense to use a
> single thread and 3 patches.

And if you actually group things together so as any individual looking
at your patches does not have to figure out which piece applies to
what, that's also better.  Anyway, the patch for putenv() is wrong in
the way the memory is freed, but this has been mentioned on another
thread.  We rely on MAXPGPATH heavily so your patch trying to change
the buffer length does not bring much, and the windows-crypt call is
also wrong based for the version handling, as discussed on another
thread.
--
Michael

On Tue, Dec 17, 2019 at 9:06 AM Ranier Vilela <ranier_gyn@hotmail.com> wrote:
> De: Michael Paquier
> Enviadas: Terça-feira, 17 de Dezembro de 2019 04:45
> >And if you actually group things together so as any individual looking
> >at your patches does not have to figure out which piece applies to
> >what, that's also better.
> I'm still trying to find the best way.

A lot of your emails, like this one, seem to be replies to other
emails, but at least in my mail reader (gmail) something you're doing
is causing the threading to get broken, so it's very hard to know what
this is replying to.

Also, the way the quoted material is presented in your emails is quite
odd-looking.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Greetings,

* Robert Haas (robertmhaas@gmail.com) wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 17, 2019 at 9:06 AM Ranier Vilela <ranier_gyn@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > De: Michael Paquier
> > Enviadas: Terça-feira, 17 de Dezembro de 2019 04:45
> > >And if you actually group things together so as any individual looking
> > >at your patches does not have to figure out which piece applies to
> > >what, that's also better.
> > I'm still trying to find the best way.
>
> A lot of your emails, like this one, seem to be replies to other
> emails, but at least in my mail reader (gmail) something you're doing
> is causing the threading to get broken, so it's very hard to know what
> this is replying to.

I'm reasonably confident (though I can't be sure about gmail, but I see
the same thing in mutt) the issue here is that there's no References or
In-Reply-To headers in the emails.  There's some 'Thread-Subject' and
'Thread-Index' headers but it seems that gmail and mutt can't sort out
what those are or how to use them to do proper threading (if it's even
possible with those headers..  I'm not really sure how you'd use the
'Thread-Index' value since it seems to just be a hex code..).

> Also, the way the quoted material is presented in your emails is quite
> odd-looking.

Yeah, agree with this too, though that bothers me somewhat less than the
threading issue.

Thanks,

Stephen

De: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Enviado: quarta-feira, 18 de dezembro de 2019 15:44

>A lot of your emails, like this one, seem to be replies to other
>emails, but at least in my mail reader (gmail) something you're doing
>is causing the threading to get broken, so it's very hard to know what
>this is replying to.

I can't tell if it's me doing something wrong or if live outlook can't organize it the right way.
Anyway, I will switch to gmail,
ranier.vf@gmail.com, to see if it looks better.

regards,
Ranier Vilela

Greetings,

* Ranier Vilela (ranier_gyn@hotmail.com) wrote:
> De: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
> Enviado: quarta-feira, 18 de dezembro de 2019 15:44
>
> >A lot of your emails, like this one, seem to be replies to other
> >emails, but at least in my mail reader (gmail) something you're doing
> >is causing the threading to get broken, so it's very hard to know what
> >this is replying to.
>
> I can't tell if it's me doing something wrong or if live outlook can't organize it the right way.

Alright, well, oddly enough, *this* email included the other headers and
appears threaded properly (in mutt, at least).

Did you do something different when replying to this email vs. the other
emails you've been replying to?

Also- it's custom here to "reply-all" and not to just reply to the list.

Thanks,

Stephen