Currently we have this in plperl.c: "require Safe;"
I am thinking of submitting a patch to replace this with "use Safe 2.09;" to enforce use of a version without the known vulnerability.
Any objections?
I have none, except will 2.09 work with 5.00503?
cheers
andrew
_______________________________________________ Plperlng-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://pgfoundry.org/mailman/listinfo/plperlng-devel
-- Command Prompt, Inc., home of Mammoth PostgreSQL - S/ODBC and S/JDBC Postgresql support, programming shared hosting and dedicated hosting. +1-503-667-4564 - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://www.commandprompt.com Mammoth PostgreSQL Replicator. Integrated Replication for PostgreSQL
begin:vcard fn:Joshua D. Drake n:Drake;Joshua D. org:Command Prompt, Inc. adr:;;PO Box 215;Cascade Locks;Oregon;97014;USA email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED] title:Consultant tel;work:503-667-4564 tel;fax:503-210-0034 note:Command Prompt, Inc. is the largest and oldest US based commercial PostgreSQL support provider. We provide the only commercially viable integrated PostgreSQL replication solution, but also custom programming, and support. We authored the book Practical PostgreSQL, the procedural language plPHP, and adding trigger capability to plPerl. x-mozilla-html:FALSE url:http://www.commandprompt.com/ version:2.1 end:vcard
---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
