0.9.7x have EVP_DigestFinal function which which clears all of
EVP_MD_CTX. This makes pgcrypto crash in functions which
re-use one digest context several times: hmac() and crypt()
with md5 algorithm.
Following patch fixes it by carring the digest info around
EVP_DigestFinal and re-initializing cipher.
Marko Kreen.
Fixed bug with '=' operator for gist__int_ops and
define '=' operator for gist__intbig_ops opclass.
Now '=' operator is consistent with standard 'array' type.
Thanks Achilleus Mantzios for bug report and suggestion.
Oleg Bartunov
> > to perform sql command:
> > update pg_amop set amopreqcheck = true where amopclaid =
> > (select oid from pg_opclass where opcname = 'gist_txtidx_ops');
>
> Oleg, sorry, I don't understand where this should appear. In the README
> file, and if so, where? Is this something only for people upgrading
> from 7.2?
Sorry Bruce, I was unclear. I have attached patch to Readme.tsearch
Also, It'd be worth to mention in Changes to point users of tsearch
about importang upgrade notices.
Oleg Bartunov
CVS. It fix english stemmer's problem with ending words like
'technology'.
We have found one more bug in english stemmer. The bug is with
'irregular' english words like 'skies' -> 'sky'. Please, apply attached
cumulative patch to 7.2.1 and current CVS instead previous one.
Thank to Thomas T. Thai <tom@minnesota.com> for hard testing. This kind
of bug has significance only for dump/reload database and viewing, but
searching/indexing works right.
Teodor Sigaev
Please, apply attached patch of contrib/btree_gist to 7.2.1 and current
cvs.
The patch fixes memory leak during creation GiST index on timestamp
column.
Thank you.
--
Teodor Sigaev
teodor@stack.net
Marko Kreen says:
This is so obvious that I would like to make it 'official'.
Seems like the theology around bytea<>text casting kept me from
seeing the simple :)
wrote:
> > > Just testing pgcrypto on freebsd/alpha. I get some warnings:
> > They should be harmless, although I should fix them.
>
> The actual code is:
>
> if ((dlen & 15) || (((unsigned) res) & 3))
> return -1;
> Hard to imagine how (uint *) & 3 makes any sense, unless res isn't
> always a (uint8 *). Is that true?
At some point it was casted to (uint32*) so I wanted to be sure its ok.
ATM its pointless. Please apply the following patch.
--
marko
