Re: JDBC driver patch for non-ASCII users
От | Oliver Jowett |
---|---|
Тема | Re: JDBC driver patch for non-ASCII users |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 475B047B.5020100@opencloud.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: JDBC driver patch for non-ASCII users (sulfinu@gmail.com) |
Ответы |
Re: JDBC driver patch for non-ASCII users
|
Список | pgsql-jdbc |
sulfinu@gmail.com wrote: > On Saturday 08 December 2007, Oliver Jowett wrote: >> Also, your patch appears to have a number of unnecessary changes in it >> (e.g. why did you change the encoding used for the password salt, or the >> results of UnixCrypt? and there's a spurious change to build.xml too..) > There's nothing spurious in my patch. > I haven't touched UnixCrypt, simply because there's nothing to be done about > it (not as a simple patch). Can you explain what this change does, then? > String result = UnixCrypt.crypt(salt, password); > - byte[] encodedResult = result.getBytes("US-ASCII"); > + byte[] encodedResult = result.getBytes(Encoding.AUTHENTICATION_PHASE_ENCODING); AFAIK UnixCrypt.crypt() should only be returning ASCII anyway, right? Same thing re. salt decoding, doesn't the server only ever send ASCII? > And the change in build.xml is a correction, check the file before posting > assumptions. If you have fixes to build.xml that are not related to your encoding changes, please post them as a separate patch with an explanation. If you post a number of unrelated changes as a single patch, it makes it much harder to selectively apply them. I have no comment on whether that correction is necessary or not -- but it's unexplained and not encoding related, so it shouldn't be there. -O
В списке pgsql-jdbc по дате отправления: